i don't think psychology is broken.

A quote from a book I have been reading: "The more mature or advanced stage in the development of a science is reached when it is no longer characterized by competing schools of thought- that is, when the majority of the scientists agree on theoretical and methodological issues. At that stage, a common paradigm or model defines the entire field....Psychology has not yet reached the paradigmatic stage."

Part of me is offended by the idea that psychology is "immature" as a science. As long as we are composed of therapists who offer their opinions, there should be absolutely no expectation of complete agreement. It isn't that psychology is made of quick opinions though. Compare the therapist making a judgment about a client's mental needs with a doctor making a judgment about a patient's physical needs. The difference? The medical world is intrinsically tangible; the mental world is not.

This is an invigorating challenge. Psychology to me is so varied, and that's what I love about it. I hate the idea that it's less than it could be. Is it fair to compare it to other scientific disciplines? It is undeniable that the addition of the scientific method has been a fantastic way for psychology to show its merit, its value, its practicality. Order and control have been indispensable in this way. But it is true also that with case studies the opportunities for understanding humanity as it adapts to extraordinary cases, we have learned a great deal. Scientific control can only go so far in a world where it is simply not natural.

Is it really true that the field of psychology is fragmented? Has it ever been unified? Or is it just a name for all of the "schools of thought" that analyze human mental tendencies and thus come to be known under the same field of study? I have wondered whether psychology is indeed paradigmatical at all. Can there be agreement on the nature of human thought and behavior?


So what are the commonalities tying the field together? As a study of thought and behavior, psychology is characterized by its differences. Psychologists differ simply because they are human. And this is a wonderful reflection of how EVERY person is different-- something I think psychology has not overlooked. Psychological principles are conditional, simply because of our differences. Is there anything wrong with exceptions, or the exceptional?