Skip to main content
Log in

The relationship between scientific psychology and common-sense psychology

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between common-sense psychology (CSP) and scientific psychology (SP) — which we could call the mind-mind problem. CSP has come under much attack recently, most of which is thought to be unjust or misguided. This paper's first section examines the many differences between the aims, interests, explananda, explanantia, methodology, conceptual frameworks, and relationships to the neurosciences, that divide CSP and SP. Each of the two is valid within its own territory, and there is no competition between them — primarily because CSP is not, and has no interest in being, a ‘scientific theory’. In the second section some implications are drawn. First, neither CSP nor SP has the mind-body problem in its familiar form. Second, CSP, for excellent reasons, is not equipped to handle irrational or non-rational behaviour; there are some grounds for believing that this can and should be the task of SP. Third, ‘philosophical psychology’, or armchair ‘theories’ of action, perception, etc., are doomed to failure. And, fourth, the realm of the psychological is so heterogeneous that no single model for either CSP or SP is likely to succeed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics.

  • Asher, R.: 1972, Talking Sense, Pitman Books Ltd., London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N.: 1983, How the Laws of Physics Lie, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchland, P. M.: 1981, ‘Eliminative Materialism and Propositional Attitudes’, Journal of Philosophy 78, 67–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchland, P. S.: 1986, Neurophilosophy, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D.: 1963, ‘Actions, Reasons, and Causes’, Journal of Philosophy 60, 685–700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D.: 1969, ‘How is Weakness of the Will Possible?’, in J. Feinberg (ed.), Moral Concepts, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 93–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D.: 1970, ‘Mental Events’, in L. Foster and J. W. Swanson (eds.), Experience and Theory, University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst MA, pp. 79–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D.: 1974, ‘Psychology as Philosophy’, in S. C. Brown (ed.), Philosophy of Psychology, Macmillan Press, London, pp. 41–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D.: 1981, ‘Three Kinds of Intentional Psychology’, in R. Healey (ed.), Reduction, Time and Reality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 37–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupré, J.: 1981, ‘Natural Kinds and Biological Taxa’, Philosophical Review 90, 66–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, H.: 1978, ‘Mental Representation’, Erkenntnis 13, 9–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A.: 1975, The Language of Thought, Thomas Y. Crowell Co., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A.: 1987, Psychosemantics, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S.: 1985 (1963), ‘Project for a Scientific Psychology’, in J. Strachey (ed.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Hogarth Press, London, vol. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S.: 1920 (1963), ‘Beyond the Pleasure Principle’, in J. Strachey (ed.), op. cit., vol. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I.: 1983, Representing and Intervening, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W.: 1974, ‘Psychology: Preparadigmatic, Postparadigmatic, or Misparadigmatic?’, Science Studies 4, 406–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lycan, W.: 1981, ‘Toward a Homuncular Theory of Believing’, Cognition and Brain Theory 4, 139–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, G., and Kessen, W.: 1959, The Language of Psychology, New York Publishers, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S.: 1906, A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive, 8th ed., Longmans, Green and Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nestle, J.: 1982, ‘Understanding Psychological Man’, Psychology Today 16, 40–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton-Smith, W. H.: 1981, The Rationality of Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. P.: 1975, Helplessness, W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stich, S.: 1983, From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science: The Case Against Belief, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. F.: 1959, Individuals, Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Fraassen, B. C.: 1980, The Scientific Image, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. J.: 1973, ‘Psychology: A Prescriptive Science’, in M. Heule, J. Jaynes, and J. J. Sullivan (eds.), Historical Conceptions of Psychology, Springer Publishing, New York, pp. 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkes, K. V.: 1984, ‘Pragmatics in Science and Theory in Common Sense’, Inquiry 27, 339–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkes, K. V.: 1986, ‘Nemo Psychologus Nisi Physiologus’, Inquiry 29, 165–85.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilkes, K.V. The relationship between scientific psychology and common-sense psychology. Synthese 89, 15–39 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413797

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00413797

Keywords

Navigation