Joaquim Quintino-Aires

Psychology is now one of the most popular sciences for young students. But whether academic production or professional practice, it is still in crisis. When we look together at two different approaches we realize the enormous amount of syncretism. They are not only two different approaches to the same science. They are more than that, they are different areas of knowledge, with very different practical implications. Discussion of psychology with the other sciences researching the same "objects" is nonexistent. So when it comes to practice, many of young psychologists leave the profession.

This article is an invitation to colleagues for a "look inside" this interesting science that can make a significant contribution to human sciences and the better life of human beings in the 21st century. This call is supported by a re-reading of the text by Lev S. Vygotsky The historical meaning of the crisis in psychology written in 1927. The article is structured in four subtopics: the problem of general science (in Psychology), the problem of terminology, the problem of difficulty in recognizing the crisis and the problem of emptiness. Being a call, of course, it is not a complete and finished analysis. It is rather a desire that, engaging some colleagues, we can continue the dialogue with Vygotsky on this topic started by him ninety years ago.

Any psychological paradigm needs a psychopathological system that helps professionals to describe and explain the behavioral expressions that deviate from “normal” (whether this term is used with the semantic property of statistical or ideal adaptations). In this work, I seek to present the system that I have been developing since 1998 among the psychologists at the Instituto Vegotsky de Lisboa (Vygotsky Institute of Lisbon), Portugal, to understand psychopathology with regard to the vygotskian approach. It was conceived and designed according to the work of Rita Mendes Leal and her contribution to socioemotional development theory, AR Luria’s systemic and dynamic theory of the human brain, the theory of Activity (dyatel’nost) of AN Leont’ev, and the psychopathological German school of E Kraepelin, presented and disseminated in Portugal in the early twentieth century by Professor Sobral Cid. It is intended to be a proposal to colleagues who are interested in postnonclassical psychology and a request for arguments.