Notes on a naturalized epistemology

Abstract

Contemporary psychology has been described as a fragmented discipline. Many commentators argue that such fragmentation results from the development of diverse research practices and theoretical commitments. Hoshmand and Martin (1994) suggest that an historico-descriptive case study method, which begins at the level of epistemologies-in-action, might naturalize the epistemology of psychological research and provide a basis for unity in psychology. An historico-descriptive method would do so by providing a working epistemology, i.e., a common set of rules for the selection of research methods and the adjudication of research programs. The present article suggests that such an historico-descriptive case study method might indeed be helpful, but only if preceded by a rigorous, critical examination of the theoretical grounds upon which psychology itself, and any historico-descriptive method, might be based. Such a theoretical examination must continually complement any historico-descriptive inquiry in the founding of a working epistemology.