普遍主义不是白人:对苏等人的评论(2024)。

IF 12.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Michael J Strambler
{"title":"普遍主义不是白人:对苏等人的评论(2024)。","authors":"Michael J Strambler","doi":"10.1037/amp0001489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This commentary responds to Sue et al.'s (see record 2025-04512-010) claim that principles such as universalism, individualism, objectivism, and empiricism are pillars of White epistemology. Drawing on W. E. B. Du Bois's embrace of Western intellectual traditions, this commentary argues that such ideals are not inherently racialized but rather central to human flourishing. In their critique of universalism, Sue and colleagues conflated the misapplication of universalism with the intended meaning of the concept. Rather than characterizing universalism in racial terms, this commentary contends that its accurate application promotes fairness and inclusivity and aligns with civil rights and human rights movements. Defining valuable concepts like universalism through a racial lens risks alienating scholars and undermining ideas that could advance mental health and psychological research across all demographics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48468,"journal":{"name":"American Psychologist","volume":"3 1","pages":"966-967"},"PeriodicalIF":12.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Universalism is not White: Commentary on Sue et al. (2024).\",\"authors\":\"Michael J Strambler\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/amp0001489\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This commentary responds to Sue et al.'s (see record 2025-04512-010) claim that principles such as universalism, individualism, objectivism, and empiricism are pillars of White epistemology. Drawing on W. E. B. Du Bois's embrace of Western intellectual traditions, this commentary argues that such ideals are not inherently racialized but rather central to human flourishing. In their critique of universalism, Sue and colleagues conflated the misapplication of universalism with the intended meaning of the concept. Rather than characterizing universalism in racial terms, this commentary contends that its accurate application promotes fairness and inclusivity and aligns with civil rights and human rights movements. Defining valuable concepts like universalism through a racial lens risks alienating scholars and undermining ideas that could advance mental health and psychological research across all demographics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Psychologist\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"966-967\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Psychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001489\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001489","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇评论回应了苏等人(见记录2025-04512-010)的主张,即普遍主义、个人主义、客观主义和经验主义等原则是怀特认识论的支柱。杜波依斯(w.e.b. Du Bois)对西方知识传统的信奉,这篇评论认为,这些理想本身并不是种族化的,而是人类繁荣的核心。在对普遍主义的批判中,苏及其同事将普遍主义的误用与普遍主义概念的本意混为一谈。这篇评论并没有将普世主义定性为种族主义,而是认为普世主义的准确应用促进了公平和包容,并与民权和人权运动保持一致。通过种族视角来定义普遍主义等有价值的概念,可能会疏远学者,破坏那些可以在所有人口统计学中推进心理健康和心理学研究的想法。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Universalism is not White: Commentary on Sue et al. (2024).
This commentary responds to Sue et al.'s (see record 2025-04512-010) claim that principles such as universalism, individualism, objectivism, and empiricism are pillars of White epistemology. Drawing on W. E. B. Du Bois's embrace of Western intellectual traditions, this commentary argues that such ideals are not inherently racialized but rather central to human flourishing. In their critique of universalism, Sue and colleagues conflated the misapplication of universalism with the intended meaning of the concept. Rather than characterizing universalism in racial terms, this commentary contends that its accurate application promotes fairness and inclusivity and aligns with civil rights and human rights movements. Defining valuable concepts like universalism through a racial lens risks alienating scholars and undermining ideas that could advance mental health and psychological research across all demographics. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Psychologist
American Psychologist PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
18.50
自引率
1.20%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: Established in 1946, American Psychologist® is the flagship peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the American Psychological Association. It publishes high-impact papers of broad interest, including empirical reports, meta-analyses, and scholarly reviews, covering psychological science, practice, education, and policy. Articles often address issues of national and international significance within the field of psychology and its relationship to society. Published in an accessible style, contributions in American Psychologist are designed to be understood by both psychologists and the general public.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信