The article is focused on the history of psychology from a perspective of its paradigm shifts. Based on the transspective analysis, the author identifies the grounds for progressive development of the psychological science as an open self-organizing theoretical system. The transspective analysis is also considered a methodological tool for studying self-organizing psychological systems. It is asserted that modern psychology is moving toward a post-non-classical paradigm within the framework of which psyche and consciousness acquire a new explanation.
The paper presents analysis of principles, treatments and ways of using phenomenology in psychology. Six different ways of using phenomenological method in psychology are discerned: as
(1) a method of clarifying of phenomena of consciousness and concepts,
(2) a way of differentiation, description and analysis of psychopathological phenomena,
(3) a way of understanding and penetration to the living world of a person,
(4) a form of subjective self-reports of participants,
(5) a method of psychotherapeutic work with experience,
(6) a qualitative research strategy in academic psychology.
The approach to phenomenology as a special style of research and practice, which implies the intuitive, reflective, unprejudiced, descriptive, detailed approach to phenomena, is developed.
Russian psychology which had been cut off from the world science for the greater part of the 20th century is now facing a challenge to join the international mainstream. To facilitate the integration of Russian psychology into the international mainstream, a certain hermeneutics is needed, applied to the explicit methodology and terminology Russian scientists used, as well as to the system of implicit beliefs and assumptions concerning human nature "embedded" into the Russian psychology. The latter is compared to its counterparts in major Western psychological theories.
This article looks at the main symptoms of the crisis in psychology. The author believes that in addition to the traditional manifestations that have dogged psychology since it emerged as an independent science, there have appeared some new symptoms. The author identifies three fundamental "ruptures": "vertical" ruptures between various schools and trends, "horizontal" ruptures between natural science and humanitarian psychology and "diagonal" ruptures between research (academic) and practical psychology. In the author's opinion, these manifestations of the crisis of psychology have recently been compounded by the crisis of its rationalistic foundations.
