[The problem of interpretation in psychology].
[The problem of interpretation in psychology].
复制标题
[心理学中的解释问题].
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1975
影响因子：
0.1
通讯作者：
R. Y. Yáñez Cortés
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Y. Yáñez Cortés
对于所有所谓的“人的科学”来说，处理方法问题的方式是必不可少的，但在心理学中，这一点尤为重要。心理学在它的几个学校一直是，仍然是一门学科，主要是作为一种方法来理解自己的目标。事实上，心理学的科学基础在于能够确定和确立解释对象。从解释的描述开始，我们提出了以下几个阶段：a）在感知或想象的层面上理解给定的数据。B）缺乏的特征，或信仰的特征。c）象征性层面; d）意义。这四个阶段在寻求（按照康德的观点，在我们所追求的理想意义上）一种尽可能接近绝对性的总体，也就是说，尽可能适合于它的对象。显然，解释的基础是模糊性，也就是说，对被解释的对象进行完全充分的解释是“不可能的”。这种“不可能性”是寻求完美充分性的解释的限度;另一方面，这种限度是“人的本质”与意识形态之间关系的气氛。也就是说，解释方法的澄清取决于对“人的科学”和意识形态之间关系的历史的和具体的解释，这意味着一方面是真正的科学发现，另一方面是这些发现的非法扩展（意识形态扩展）。此外，在一般意义上，所谓“人的科学”的可能性，恰恰依赖于科学与意识形态之间不断变化的关系，因为它们是历史性的，来源于事实。
It is essential to all of the so-called "Sciences of Man" the way in which the problem of method is approached but it is most specifically important in Psychology. Psychology in its several schools has been and still is the discipline which mostly uses as a method to understand its own goal. As a matter of fact, the scientific basis of Psychology lies on the possibility of being able to determine and establish the object of interpretation. Starting from the description of interpretation we propose the following stages: a) The given data understood at a perceptive or imaginative level. b) Doxic characteristics, or characteristics of belief. c) Symbolic level, and d) Significance. The four stages integrate in the search (in the ideal sense at which we aim, according to Kant) of a totality as near to apodicticity as possible, that is to say, as adequate as possible to its object. Obviously the base-line on which interpretation is built up is ambiguity, that is the "impossibility" of a perfect adequacy of interpretation to the object being interpreted. This "impossibility" is the limit of interpretation as far as the search for perfect adequacy is concerned; this limit, on the other hand, is the atmosphere of the relationship between "Siences of Man" and ideologies. That is, the clarification of the method of interpretation depends on the historic and concrete explanation of the relationship between "Sciences of Man" and ideologies, meaning on the one hand, the truly scientific discoveries and, on the other hand, the illicit extension of those discoveries (ideologic extension). Furthermore, in a general sense the possibility of constituting the so-called "Sciences of Man" relies precisely on the everchanging relationship between science and ideology, because they are historic and stem from facts.