Search

The twin problems facing nineteenth-century American “mental and moral philosophy” of the nature of psychological language and the constraints that religious beliefs placed on possibilities of innovation in a “scientific Psychology” are both highly visible in the work of Noah Porter, who was unable to resolve them. They are also more covertly identifiable in the works of James McCosh and others in this school. It is suggested that the transition to the “New Psychology” of the 1880s and 1890s needs to be rethought in light of this in three respects: (a) ironically, it entailed repressing insights into the psychological language problem, (b) the legacy of the religious factor profoundly affected U.S. Psychology and played a less unambiguously negative role in its fortunes than customarily portrayed, and (c) the transition was itself a more complex and protracted process than is portrayed in traditional “revolutionary” accounts. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contributes to the critique of evolutionary psychology (EP) presented by Gannon. It argues that while it proved problematic to develop an effective multidisciplinary approach to understanding human evolution, EP need not have turned out to have such a narrow remit. Contemporary EP emerged on the socio-biology-psychology borderline rapidly disconnecting from the palæodisciplines. This is attributed to the cultural pre-occupations in the US with gender-relations, sexual behaviour and male aggression. This paper is a plea for the reinstatement of palaepsychology and the discovery of how psychology might contribute to that multidisciplinary endeavour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]