[Objectivity and subjectivity of knowledge in nomological social sciences].

S Zepf
{"title":"[Objectivity and subjectivity of knowledge in nomological social sciences].","authors":"S Zepf","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article the question is discussed in how far the processes of understanding in the nomological social sciences an \"objectivication\", which is demanded of psychoanalysts, can be used for psychoanalytically gained insights to human behavior. For one it is shown that it is impossible in principle to verify or falsify hypotheses within the nomologically oriented methodological self understanding. Furthermore the logical, empirical scientific process obligated to proving hypotheses is pursued in the perspective of a psychoanalytic social psychology and the thesis is developed that these insights, which are gained in nomological research projects are also always products of neurotic-blind interaction, so that nothing can be said of the value of knowledge gained in these research findings as long as the scientists do not clarify their research practice psychoanalytically.</p>","PeriodicalId":76859,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychoanalyse","volume":"41 1","pages":"17-29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychoanalyse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article the question is discussed in how far the processes of understanding in the nomological social sciences an "objectivication", which is demanded of psychoanalysts, can be used for psychoanalytically gained insights to human behavior. For one it is shown that it is impossible in principle to verify or falsify hypotheses within the nomologically oriented methodological self understanding. Furthermore the logical, empirical scientific process obligated to proving hypotheses is pursued in the perspective of a psychoanalytic social psychology and the thesis is developed that these insights, which are gained in nomological research projects are also always products of neurotic-blind interaction, so that nothing can be said of the value of knowledge gained in these research findings as long as the scientists do not clarify their research practice psychoanalytically.

[法理学社会科学知识的客观性与主体性]。
在这篇文章中,我们讨论了法理学社会科学的理解过程——精神分析学家所要求的“客观化”——在多大程度上可以用于精神分析学对人类行为的洞察。首先,它表明,原则上不可能在以法理学为导向的方法论自我理解中验证或证伪假设。此外,从精神分析社会心理学的角度来看,逻辑的、经验的科学过程有义务证明假设,并提出了这样的论点:在法理学研究项目中获得的这些见解也总是神经盲相互作用的产物,因此,只要科学家不以精神分析的方式澄清他们的研究实践,就不能说这些研究发现中获得的知识的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信