{"title":"格-伊-契尔巴诺夫与心理科学的主体概念","authors":"V. Mazilov, N. Vlasov","doi":"10.17759/chp.2024200210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article describes the results of a study of G.I. Chelpanov's ideas about the subject of psychological science. We applied comparative historical and bibliographic methods, categorical analysis; the source base of the study was monographs, textbooks and articles by G.I. Chelpanov, published in the first quarter of the 20th century, as well as the works of his scientific opponents. In the first part of the article devoted to his methodological views in the pre-revolutionary period, it is argued that the scientist included psychic (mental) phenomena of consciousness to the concept of \"subject of psychology\", which caused rejection by most representatives of philosophical and natural fields in Russian psychological science. The second part of the article examines the methodological views of G.I. Chelpanov in the 1920s, he kept his views on the subject of psychology as they were before the Russian Revolution. The article captures his confrontation with the proponents of the \"behavioral turn\" in psychology, who tried to carry out a Marxist restructuring of psychology based on behaviorism. There are two possible interpretations of G.I. Chelpanov's commitment to psychic (mental) phenomena as a subject of psychology: according to the first, the scientist appears to be a fighter for truth, not ready to sacrifice principles for political conjuncture, in the second, his position is assessed as conservative, supporting outdated scientific ideas.","PeriodicalId":512758,"journal":{"name":"Cultural-Historical Psychology","volume":"1 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"G.I. Chelpanov and the Concept of the Subject of Psychological Science\",\"authors\":\"V. Mazilov, N. Vlasov\",\"doi\":\"10.17759/chp.2024200210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article describes the results of a study of G.I. Chelpanov's ideas about the subject of psychological science. We applied comparative historical and bibliographic methods, categorical analysis; the source base of the study was monographs, textbooks and articles by G.I. Chelpanov, published in the first quarter of the 20th century, as well as the works of his scientific opponents. In the first part of the article devoted to his methodological views in the pre-revolutionary period, it is argued that the scientist included psychic (mental) phenomena of consciousness to the concept of \\\"subject of psychology\\\", which caused rejection by most representatives of philosophical and natural fields in Russian psychological science. The second part of the article examines the methodological views of G.I. Chelpanov in the 1920s, he kept his views on the subject of psychology as they were before the Russian Revolution. The article captures his confrontation with the proponents of the \\\"behavioral turn\\\" in psychology, who tried to carry out a Marxist restructuring of psychology based on behaviorism. There are two possible interpretations of G.I. Chelpanov's commitment to psychic (mental) phenomena as a subject of psychology: according to the first, the scientist appears to be a fighter for truth, not ready to sacrifice principles for political conjuncture, in the second, his position is assessed as conservative, supporting outdated scientific ideas.\",\"PeriodicalId\":512758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cultural-Historical Psychology\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cultural-Historical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2024200210\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural-Historical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2024200210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
G.I. Chelpanov and the Concept of the Subject of Psychological Science
The article describes the results of a study of G.I. Chelpanov's ideas about the subject of psychological science. We applied comparative historical and bibliographic methods, categorical analysis; the source base of the study was monographs, textbooks and articles by G.I. Chelpanov, published in the first quarter of the 20th century, as well as the works of his scientific opponents. In the first part of the article devoted to his methodological views in the pre-revolutionary period, it is argued that the scientist included psychic (mental) phenomena of consciousness to the concept of "subject of psychology", which caused rejection by most representatives of philosophical and natural fields in Russian psychological science. The second part of the article examines the methodological views of G.I. Chelpanov in the 1920s, he kept his views on the subject of psychology as they were before the Russian Revolution. The article captures his confrontation with the proponents of the "behavioral turn" in psychology, who tried to carry out a Marxist restructuring of psychology based on behaviorism. There are two possible interpretations of G.I. Chelpanov's commitment to psychic (mental) phenomena as a subject of psychology: according to the first, the scientist appears to be a fighter for truth, not ready to sacrifice principles for political conjuncture, in the second, his position is assessed as conservative, supporting outdated scientific ideas.