System-complex paradigm of domestic psychology

Abstract

Background. Russian monographs and textbooks describe only foreign psychological paradigms. The paradigms developed by Russian psychologists make it possible to achieve the level of scientific philosophical generalization, but do not specify the psychological paradigms themselves. Therefore, appealing to the system-complex paradigm seems to be especially relevant at the present stage of development of domestic psychology.

Objective. The study has its purpose to present a system-complex paradigm based on the works of Russian psychologists.

Sample. The study features the works of 35 scientists.

Methods. Historical analysis (historiogenesis) of psychological literature by foreign and domestic scientists.

Results. The study showed that in the works of domestic scientists an integral Person is considered as a subject of psychology, who can be described within the framework of a system-complex paradigm and understood only through the relationship of internal and external, biological and social, individual and societal, as a system, in its interdependence and development. When considering the phenomenon of human being, the combination of structural, systemic and complex approaches with evolutionary approach seems to be the most promising at the present stage of development of a holistic human knowledge.

Conclusion. The article presents scientific and methodological statements, views and positions of authoritative Russian scientists (philosophers, historians, psychologists) to substantiate and support the system-complex paradigm of domestic psychology. Within the framework of this paradigm, important problems of human studies and human knowledge are considered. In the conditions of scientific convergence of Western and Russian psychology, for the purpose of a deep and multidimensional study of a person, it seems appropriate to abandon the unilateral application of the principles of the one and only psychological paradigm and move to a systematic and complex use of the basic principles of modern psychology in their unity and interconnection.

References

Akinshchikova, G.I. (1977). Somatic and psycho-physiological organization of a person. L.: Publishing house of Leningrad State University. (In Russ.).

Ananiev, B.G. (1969). Man as an object of knowledge. L.: Publishing house of Leningrad State University. (In Russ.).

Bertalanfi , L. (1969). General System Theory: A Brief Review. Research in General Systems Theory: Yearbook. M.: Nauk. (In Russ.).

Bekhterev, V.M. (1926). General foundations of human reflexology. M.-L: New Moscow. (In Russ.).

Blumenfeld, L.A. (1970). Speech in the discussion on the problem “Definition of the concept of a system and a systematic approach”. System Research. M.: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Druzhinin, V.N. (1999). Experimental psychology. St. Petersburg: Peter. (In Russ.).

Vecker, L.M. (1981). Mental processes in 3 volumes. T.3. Leningrad : Publishing house of Leningrad State University. (In Russ.).

Ganzen, V.A. (1974). Perception of integral objects. Leningrad: Publishing house of Leningrad State University. (In Russ.).

Garai, L., Kechke, M. (1997). Another Crisis in Psychology. Voprosy filosofii (Issues of Philosophy), 4, 86–96. (In Russ.).

Klochko, V.E. (2001). Psychosynergy: the present and future of psychology. Proceedings of the conference “Man in Psychology: Landmarks of Research in the New Century”. Karaganda: KarSU. (In Russ.).

Kon, I.S. (1989). Man in the system of sciences. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Kuhn, T. (1977). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.).

Kuzmin, V.P. (1980). The Principle of Systemity in the Theory and Methodology of K. Marx. Moscow: Politizdat. (In Russ.).

Lazursky, A.F. (1909). Essays on the Science of Character. Sankt Peterburg: Tip. I.N. Skorokhodov. (In Russ.).

Marx, K., Engels, F. (1956). From early works. Moscow: Gosudolitizdat. (In Russ.).

Mazilov, V.A. (2013). Prospects for paradigmatic synthesis in modern psychology. Yaroslavskii pedagogicheskii vestnik (Psychological and pedagogical sciences), 3 (2), 186–194. (In Russ.).

Merlin, V.S. (1986). Essays on the Integral Study of Individuality. Moscow: Prosveshcheniye. (In Russ.).

Myasischev, V.M. (1995). Psychology of Relationships. Moscow-Voronezh. (In Russ.).

Nikityuk, B.A. (2000). Integration of knowledge in sciences about the man (Sovrem. integrative anthropology). Moscow: SportAcademPress. (In Russ.).

Paradigms in psychology: scientific analysis. (Eds.), In A.L. Zhuravlev, T.V. Kornilova, A.V. Yurevich. (2012). Moscow: Institute of Psychology RAS. (In Russ.).

Platonov, K.K. (1982). The system of psychology and the theory of reflection. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Rubinstein, M.M. (1927). Philosophy of Man in 2 vols. 2. Lugansk: LSPI. (In Russ.).

Rubinstein, S.L. (1997). Selected Philosophical-Psychological Works. Fundamentals of Ontology, Logic, Psychology. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Rusalov, V.M. (1979). Biological Foundations of Individual-Psychological Differences. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Shorokhova, E.V. (1974). The psychological aspect of the problem of personality. Theoretical problems of the psychology of personality. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Wiener, N. (1958). Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in Animals and Machines. Moscow: Soviet Radio. (In Russ.).

Yurevich, A. V. (2012). Research and practical psychology: once again about “schisis”. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal (Psychological Journal), 1 (33), 127–136. (In Russ.).

Yurov, I.A. (2019). Paradigms of domestic psychology. Chelovek i mir (Man and the world), 3, 1(6), 41-64. (In Russ.).

Yurov, I.A. (2023). Psychology of man: Individual, personality, subject, individuality. Moscow: Rusains. (In Russ.).

Zhuravlev, A.L., Kornilova, T. V., Yurevich, A. V. (2012). Introduction. Paradigms in psychology: Scientific analysis. In A. L. Zhuravlev, T. V. Kornilova, A. V. Yurevich (Eds.), (pp. 3–9). Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.).

Zhuravlev, A.L., Ushakov, D.V. (2012). Theoretical-experimental and practical psychology: two different paradigms? Paradigms in psychology. Scientific analysis. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.).

Posner, M.I, Levitin, D.G. (1997). Imagining the Future. Solso, (Eds.), Nind and Brain Sciences in the 21 Centure (pp. 91–109).Cambridge: A Bradford Book.