Russian speculative and introspective psychology in 19th early 20th centuries

Аннотация

Kostrigin A.A. Russian speculative and introspective psychology in 19th ‑ early 20th centuries // Psychological science and practice: State of the Art. Collected papers / Ed. Kostrigin A.A. Chicago, 2017. P. 45-50.

One of the most important problems in studying the history of Russian psychology is the classification of its directions in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. An analysis of the views of contemporary researchers in the field of the history of psychology in relation to the structure of psychology in Russia in this period shows that, despite the wide disparity in the grounds and names of directions, two groups of research approaches can be derived with some reservations.

The first group is the division of psychology into "idealistic" and "materialistic". This approach is presented only in the Soviet history of psychology (Ananiev, 1947; Budilova, 1960). In part, such a dichotomy explains some dominance of one or another philosophical position among representatives of one or another direction, but it significantly confuses understanding. This classification is not sensitive to the concepts that were at the junction of these philosophical positions, it is not sensitive to the methods used by scientists (for example, G.I. Chelpanov).

Another major group of classifications is that where religious-philosophical (idealistic, philosophical, spiritual-moral), empirical (introspective-psychological) and experimental (natural-scientific, materialistic) psychology are distinguished (V.A. Koltsova, O.A. Artemyeva , V.V. Anshakova, A.N. Zhdan, A.R. Batyrshina, partly T.D. Martsinkovskaya, M.S. Guseltseva, E.V. Levchenko) (Artemieva, 2012; Koltsova, 1997).

Having, of course, many advantages, nevertheless, the lack of this approach is the incorrect division of scientists between empirical and religious-philosophical directions: very often those who are classified as religious-philosophical psychologists can be referred to empiricists ‑ from their texts it becomes clear еhat the positions of "true" empiricists (according to classifications of historians of psychology), both philosophers and theologians are very similar. This can be explained by the generality of the method of studying mental phenomena.

All the problems voiced are connected with insufficient clarification of the methodology (method and subject matter of research), attention to which today is drawn (Mazilov, 2014). The author offers his own classification of directions in psychology in Russia in the XIX ‑ early XX centuries, based on the dominant method of obtaining psychological knowledge (speculation, introspection, experiment and measurement): speculative psychology, introspective psychology and experimental psychology. In the article, the author considers in detail only speculative and introspective psychology, since Concerning these directions, their representatives, concepts, as well as the methods themselves (speculation and introspection), there is the greatest uncertainty and ambiguity. In each direction, two vectors are identified, corresponding to a certain conception of the nature of the subject matter of psychology: substantive psychology (the soul as an independent substance) and functional psychology (the psyche as a function of the brain and the nervous system). In the final form, the classification is as follows: 1) speculative substantive psychology and speculative functional psychology; 2) introspective substantive psychology and introspective functional psychology; 3) experimental substantional psychology and experimental functional psychology (Kostrigin, Stoyukhina, 2016; Mazilov, Kostrigin, 2016; Stoyukhina, 2014).

Initially setting a task in our work to consider only speculative and introspective psychology, let us name some representatives of these directions.

Speculative Psychology:

A) Functional: N.G. Chernyshevsky, M.A. Antonovich, P.N. Tkachev (and others).

B) Substantial: P.S. Avsenev, Antony (Khrapovitsky), S.P. Avtokratov, N.A. Berdyaev, A.A. Bogdanov, N.M. Bogolyubov, B.P. Vysheslavtsev, Archimandrite Gavriil, A.I. Galich, A.K. Gilyarevsky, F.A. Golubinsky, P. Zagorsky, F.F. Zelinsky, V.V. Zenkovsky, I.A. Ilyin, V.N. Karpov, A.A. Kozlov, V.P. Kudryavtsev-Platonov, V.I. Kutnevich, PL Lavrov, I.I. Lapshin, PI. Linitsky, N.O. Lossky, O.M. Novitsky, V.V. Rozanov, F.F. Sidonsky, V.A. Snegirev, V.S. Soloviev, G.E. Struve, M.M. Tareev, E.N. Trubetskoi, S.N. Trubetskoi, S.L. Frank, I.P. Chetverikov, L.I. Shestov (and others).

Introspective psychology:

A) Functional: N.G. Chernyshevsky, M.A. Antonovich, P.N. Tkachev (and others).

B) Substantial: P.S. Avsenev (architect Feofan), S.P. Avtokratov, Yu.A. Aikhenwald, Antony (Khrapovitsky), A.P. Aristov, Archimandrite Gavriil, A.I. Galich, A.I. Vvedensky, M.I. Vladislavlev, B.P. Vysheslavtsev, A.K. Gilyarevsky, I.M. Gobchansky, S.S. Gogotsky, M.S. Grigorevsky, N.Ya. Grot, N.G. Debolsky, P. Zagorsky, F.A. Zelenogorsky, F.F., Zelinsky, V.V. Zenkovsky, N.A. Zubovsky, V.N. Ivanovsky, I.A. Ilyin, K.D. Kavelin, A.A. Kozlov, P.L. Lavrov, I.I. Lapshin, LM Lopatin, N.O. Lossky, O.M. Novitsky, L.I. Petrazhitsky, V.V. Rozanov, L. Salome, V.A. Snegirev, G.E. Struve, M.M. Troitsky, S.N. Trubetskoi, S.L. Frank, I.P. Chetverikov, A.I. Shpakovsky, G.G. Shpet, PD Yurkevich (and others).