In the vast field of the discipline, that is popularly called “Psychology”, at least three disciplines have actually developed, as different from each other, as they are autonomous, from each other.
A specific, and independent subject, has clearly established itself, which can be defined as “Psicotecnica”.
Here I use the correct term of Psicotecnica, instead of the very dated term of “Psychotechnics” because Psicotecnica is a very ancient and classic discipline and very traditional, but it needs to be reborn again
But I’ve been dealing with this for a long time and later we will deal better also here on many other additional occasions
Such Psicotecnica discipline has little in common with psychology in the academic sense, which is cultivated especially in contemporary universities.
This fact, which seems to me quite evident, seems to escape, at least in part, to some of those who attend psychology, be they students, professionals or scholars or curious about the subject.
It is in fact common to speak of psychology as if it were a single, coherent, and homogeneous subject.
While it is not.
In fact: within the generally understood psychological movement, there are at least three main interpretations and intervention keys,.
Each key is substantially autonomous, although all the three keys often use some common terms, while attributing different meanings to each of them.
It therefore happens, at least in everyday use, that at least three different subjects are indicated with the same expression.
We denote all three with the term of Psychology.
But they are in fact three approaches, three attitudes, and in fact three disciplines, very different from each other.
There is a Psicotecnica, which stages, according to an artistic key, the creative and evolutionary potential of the mind.
Which Psico-Tecnica is separated from Psycho-Science, which writes the natural sciences of the mind in mathematical language, starting from experiments.
Which Psycho-Science is separated from Psycho-Analysis, which imagines the philosophical interpretation, or history, or storytelling, of the personal mind, in a literary form.
Psicotecnica, psychoscience, and psychoanalysis, have coexisted for centuries within the same psychological movement, but each exists and operates on its own.
This widespread ambiguity, at least for a naïve, or non-specialist observer, makes these three ways of being, thinking, and acting psychologically much more similar to appearance than they actually are in substance.
Such a recurring misunderstanding generates considerable confusion, while limiting the awareness of the special specific qualities that instead characterize, and qualify, each of the three disciplines.
The fact is that not everyone is clear, about the remarkable diversity that exists between psychology, as a science, which is the only real stated reason for the academic existence of a discipline bearing this name, and the many other forms in which one can interact with human subjectivity, albeit outside that systematic, scientific project of a positivist and objectivist slant, which precisely characterizes psychology as a science.
The other forms of psychology, beyond its classically rationalist dimension, are at least as interesting as scientific research, and perform important functions in our culture as well as in our community, but have little to do with psychological science as such.
Although they gladly (usually: improperly) use the reference to scientific psychology as their basis for disciplinary certification. The general public likes to believe in the existence of a psychological discipline, that lies halfway between the natural sciences and medicine, which carries out basic research, mostly in the laboratory, the results of which would represent the solid objective foundation for professional practice.
Such applications of scientific psychology, would be substantiated in the effective treatment of various forms of mental illness, as well as in providing useful support, and counseling, for the emotional and behavioral problems that normal people (so to speak) encounter in their daily life.
Such a vision of psychology certainly represents a beautiful fairy tale, sincerely appreciated by the most naïve of students and instrumentally cultivated by even the most attentive professionals in the sector.
Especially because it is the one, that sells the most, on a scientific, intellectual, and professional level.
But it is also a fiction, unrealistic, and even grotesque, very little founded on both the historical and the scientific level.
Let’s keep in touch through::
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/in/perussia [linkedin]
Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/felice.peru… [instagram]
Mio Sito – http://perussia.it/