Making the Invisible Visible

Bernhard Geissler
{"title":"Making the Invisible Visible","authors":"Bernhard Geissler","doi":"10.30820/0942-2285-2023-1-173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advocates of first-person-perspective-methods (FPPM) claim that any psychological concept must be grounded in a descriptive analysis (first-person-foundationalism). It is often assumed that the concept of the unconscious is incompatible with FPPM, and that its acceptance implies the rejection of first-person-foundationalism. This view is based on the following assumption: either FPPM are generally incapable of engaging with the unconscious, or FPPM are incapable of accounting for the systematic independence of the unconscious. It is the aim of this paper to show that this assumption is wrong. I argue that a) phenomenology has access to the unconscious, b) phenomenology can account for the systematic independence of the unconscious, and c) accepting the concept of the unconscious does imply the rejection of first-person-foundationalism.","PeriodicalId":246367,"journal":{"name":"Journal für Psychologie","volume":"7 168 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal für Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30820/0942-2285-2023-1-173","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

Advocates of first-person-perspective-methods (FPPM) claim that any psychological concept must be grounded in a descriptive analysis (first-person-foundationalism). It is often assumed that the concept of the unconscious is incompatible with FPPM, and that its acceptance implies the rejection of first-person-foundationalism. This view is based on the following assumption: either FPPM are generally incapable of engaging with the unconscious, or FPPM are incapable of accounting for the systematic independence of the unconscious. It is the aim of this paper to show that this assumption is wrong. I argue that a) phenomenology has access to the unconscious, b) phenomenology can account for the systematic independence of the unconscious, and c) accepting the concept of the unconscious does imply the rejection of first-person-foundationalism.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
让不可见变为可见
第一人称视角方法(FPPM)的倡导者声称,任何心理学概念都必须建立在描述性分析的基础上(第一人称基础主义)。人们通常认为无意识的概念与FPPM是不相容的,接受它意味着拒绝第一人称基础主义。这种观点基于以下假设:要么FPPM通常无法与无意识接触,要么FPPM无法解释无意识的系统独立性。本文的目的就是要证明这种假设是错误的。我认为a)现象学可以接触到无意识,b)现象学可以解释无意识的系统独立性,c)接受无意识的概念确实意味着拒绝第一人称基础主义。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beschämung als symbolisch-sexualisierte Gewaltausübung #seggs ohne Scham? Die Emotion Scham in der Schule Sexualität, Sexpositivität und Scham Die leise Macht der Scham
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1