Psychology as a Pradigm

Thomas Kuhn asserts that sciences more mature than psychology have reached what he describes as a paradigm (Kuhn, 1963). A paradigm is a model, universally accepted by practitioners of a science during the period of its development (Watson, 1966). A paradigm must attract adherents away from approaches that oppose its own, and is sufficiently open-ended so that the problems it leaves can be resolved (Locurto, 2013; Kuhn, 1963). Therefore, a paradigm directs research and defines problems worth solving (Locurto, 2013). With a global acceptance among practitioners a paradigm defines the science it operates under. Kuhn (1963) recognizes that the scientific fields of physics, chemistry, astronomy, and biology all are paradigmatic. Illustrative in physics is Newton’s Principia and his Laws of Motion, in chemistry there is Lavoisier and atomic theory, and in biology there is Darwin’s theory of evolution via natural selection (Locurto, 2013; Kuhn, 1963). Psychology has not experienced anything comparable to what the laws of motion have done for physics, what atomic theory has done for chemistry, and what evolution has done for biology. Furthermore, the chances of a paradigm arising in psychology are very slim. The downfalls of the many fields of study in psychology’s history serve as a precursor to psychology being unable to become a paradigmatic science.

The first field of psychology that failed to develop as a paradigm was defined as introspection, introduced be Wilhelm Wundt in 1879. Wundt’s system of psychology worked under the assumption that all the working things of the mind could be revealed by internal perception, or introspection, and that conscious processes can be analyzed into their elements (Locurto, 2013). A criticism o...

... middle of paper ...

... gains as a discipline. However, psychology lacks agreement about the nature of psychology and the model under which it should be studied. Throughout history psychology has had continuous debates over the fundamentals of psychology (Watson, 1996). In research, there have been, and will continue to be, countless debates about the overall framework and methodology in an experiment. There have been endless debates about what should be included in the science of psychology (Watson, 1996). It is because of this that psychology has not come across, any area of its field, remotely close to paradigms equivalent to that of Isaac Newton’s Laws of motions in physics or Darwin’s theory of evolution in biology. This history of the lack of unity among psychologists is what can lead one to believe that, at least in twenty years psychology will not become a paradigmatic science.