The history of psychology in solving the problem of the development and organization of domestic psychology

Artemeva Ol'ga Arkadjevna ORCID: 0000-0002-0093-0166 Doctor of Psychology Professor of the department of General Psychology, Head of the Laboratory of Methodology and History of Psychology, Irkutsk State University 664025, Russia, Irkutsk, Chkalova str., 2, office 205 oaartemeva@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

Modern society, with its characteristic active transformations and challenges, brings a psychologist to a number of the most sought-after specialists. Practical psychologists are in demand in the fields of consultation, training, expertise, prevention, correction, etc. Applied psychological research contributes to the identification of problem points and mechanisms of the occurrence of negative socio-psychological phenomena, the construction of forecasts and recommendations for the optimization of psychological reality. Thanks to the fundamental research of psychologists, science is getting closer to understanding the basic laws of the mental activity of animals, people and their associations.

Understanding the place and role of individual areas of psychology in the system of scientific knowledge and practical assistance, as well as in the system of psychology itself, makes it possible to effectively use their capabilities at the present stage of development and transformation of society. One of these areas is the history of psychology. Its relevance is not self-evident. For a psychology student, as well as a significant part of practical psychologists and even researchers, the history of their own science seems to be a set of not always relevant and heuristic theories, the knowledge of which is unlikely to be useful in their work. At the same time, familiarity with the methodological apparatus of modern historical and psychological research reveals the possibilities and prospects of this field of psychology for solving the problems of modern society.

In this regard, the subject of scientific research of the author of the article is the theoretical and methodological foundations of modern historical and psychological research of the development and organization of psychological science in Russia. The novelty of such a definition of the subject and the formulation of the problem is associated with the prospects of identifying the theoretical foundations for the application of the accumulated arsenal of methods and principles of historical and psychological research to study the patterns and features of the development and organization of psychological cognition based on the results of specific empirical studies of the development of domestic psychology. The possibilities of determining the theoretical and methodological foundations of the study of the organization of psychological science from the standpoint of the history of psychology, allowing the use of a significant array of data on the organization of effective scientific activity for decades, determine the relevance of such a statement of the problem.

Functions of the history of psychology for the development of psychology

The works of R. Smith, T. Leahy, H. Luke, V.A. Koltsova and others are devoted to determining the place of the history of psychology in the system of psychology, science and practice. ^{[13;14;24;26]}. In them, the authors consider the history of psychology, first of all, as a field of humanitarian knowledge, in contrast to natural and social sciences (see, for example: ^{[14, pp. 41-43]}; ^{[13, pp. 65-94]}). They determine the theoretical and methodological foundations ^[13] and the importance of historical and psychological knowledge and analysis for practice ^[25] and theory of psychology ^[16]. The analysis of the works of these authors allows us to characterize the actual ideas about the functions of the history of psychology for public practice, psychological and general scientific knowledge. So, to equip the researcher to conduct relevant comprehensive research on the development and organization of psychological science.

The most obvious function is cognitive: the history of psychology acts as a source of knowledge of all known scientific psychological facts and concepts explaining them, i.e. the foundation of any scientific research. Performing a reflexive function, the history of psychology also helps to adequately assess the cognitive capabilities and transformative potential of psychological knowledge^[12]. One can agree with V.A. Yakunin's definition of the history of psychology as an "apparatus of self-control and self-knowledge" of psychological science ^{[19, p. 10]}. This role is especially relevant in the context of increasing problems of ethics of psychological research and impact, social responsibility of science ^[1].

The social and axiological functions of historical and psychological knowledge are connected with the reflexive function. The social function is responsible for understanding the role and place of psychology in the system of social structure. The experience of applying psychological knowledge to solve educational, educational, industrial, defense, propaganda, therapeutic, etc. tasks in the history of different countries testifies to the possibilities of attracting psychologists to solve urgent problems of modern society.

However, the history of psychology is a source of knowledge not only about the possibilities, but also the limitations of the intervention of a research psychologist and practitioner in the social activity of an individual and a group. This is its axiological function. Historical and psychological knowledge is involved in determining the criteria for evaluating psychological theories, psychological safety of methods and systems of practical assistance. Indicative evidence of this is the history of social psychology, which has preserved data on the negative consequences for the personality of the participants in the prison experiment F. Zimbardo.

Accumulating and systematizing the main achievements of psychology and related scientific disciplines, the history of psychology implements an integrative function. Allows you to build connections between different sciences about man, society and thinking. Thereby outlining the prospects of interdisciplinary scientific research, integration of sciences.

Knowledge and understanding of the history of the formation and development of psychology helps to avoid the mistakes of problematization and planning the ways of development of modern psychological science and practice. This implements the organizational and scientific function of the history of psychology ^[12], responsible for the researcher's choice of a promising direction of scientific search. Familiarity with the results and achievements of psychological cognition allows you to avoid repeating unproductive research strategies, discovering what is already known and direct efforts in a constructive way of scientific cognition. This is the "function of stimulating the progressive development of psychological science" ^{[12, p. 224]}.

Finally, it is on the basis of historical and psychological knowledge that it is possible to build a forecast of the development of psychology. The vector of its movement is "from the study of the past psychological knowledge – to a deeper understanding of its current state and further – to the prediction of tomorrow's development of psychology" ^{[12, p. 225]}. In this, the prognostic function of the history of psychology is realized. "Being a retrospective discipline," it is "directed to the future" ^[12].

The list of functions of the history of psychology highlights the importance of the history of psychology for the development of psychological knowledge and practice, determining the place of psychology in the life of modern man and society. The history of psychology helps in the systematization of accumulated psychological ideas and methods, in determining promising lines and forecasting the development of psychology. For the subject of psychological cognition of different levels of socio-psychological organization – from the personality of a scientist to the scientific community and society as a whole – historical and psychological knowledge is a "safety cushion". Possession of it protects the subject from incorrect, dead-end and unsafe ways of psychological cognition and influence. It allows not only to consciously and competently choose the path of psychological research and assistance, but also prepares for the inevitable difficulties on this path.

History of psychology and psychological cognition

In the works of V.A. Koltsova it is shown that the object of historical and psychological research is the process of psychological cognition ^[12]. Its study involves an appeal to the "epistemological" and "ontological" aspects of the development of psychological knowledge ^[12]. At the same time, the history of psychology acts not only as a repository of concrete results of scientific study of a person and a group, but also as a real process of psychological cognition, formation and development of psychology in specific social conditions. With their contradictions, challenges, paradoxes, stages of progress, containment and implicit development.

The subject of the history of psychology is "the regularities of the formation and development of psychological cognition at different stages of the evolution of society" ^{[12, p. 60]}. The structure of psychological cognition, according to V.A. Koltsova, includes: 1) "inner space", the logical structure of cognition, i.e. the system of categories, principles and problems, as well as the main approaches to the formulation and solution of research tasks; 2) "personalistic aspect" (scientific views, positions, goals and orientation of the researcher's activity); 3) "socio-historical aspect" (conditionality scientific cognition by socio-historical determinants, culture and features of the ideological context); 4) the "procedural-dynamic aspect" of cognition (the real process of searching and accumulating psychological knowledge) ^{[13, p. 117]}. These aspects of psychological cognition correspond to three aspects or coordinates of the development of science identified by M.G. Yaroshevsky – "subject-logical", "personal-psychological" and "social" ^{[21, p. 178]}. With the important difference that V.A. Koltsova, from the standpoint of the history of psychology, insists on the need to supplement the three aspects with the fourth – procedural-dynamic. Thanks to the study of psychological cognition as a real process, and not only its recorded final results, it is possible to reconstruct the historical path of psychology development.

The systematic study of psychological cognition in the unity of these aspects is the main direction of the organization of modern historical and psychological search. All four aspects are realized in unity with each other. This statement is especially true in relation to the procedural-dynamic aspect. Both the development of psychological thought and the participation of the individual of a particular scientist and society in scientific knowledge is carried out in dynamics, development; it is a continuous process of searching for truth.

These aspects of scientific knowledge determine the significance and place of the history of psychology in the system of scientific knowledge and social practice. The development of problems of each of the aspects of psychological cognition makes it possible to enrich such branches and sections of psychology as the methodology of psychology and theoretical psychology, the psychology of scientific creativity, the social psychology of science, historical psychology. Thus, the history of psychology sets the space for interdisciplinary research. It, firstly, participates in the definition of the problem and the subject of a specific study and, secondly, is a source of empirical data for the study: 1) problems, categories and basic principles of psychology; 2) features of the psychology of the personality of the scientist and the scientific community in different historical epochs; 3) conditions of scientific creativity; 4) patterns of organization of scientific activity and self-organization of the scientific community.

The history of psychology and the organization of science: the results of a comprehensive study

To demonstrate the possibilities of historical and psychological analysis of the main aspects of the development of scientific knowledge, we will give a brief description of the results of a comprehensive study of leading research teams in the history of Soviet psychology in the first half of the twentieth century, conducted by the Laboratory of Methodology and History of Psychology of Irkutsk State University under our leadership. Based on the results of bibliographic analysis of lists and content analysis of titles of works, quantitative and qualitative analysis of biographies and data on the activities of members and heads of research teams created under the leadership of V.M. Bekhterev, G.I. Chelpanov and L.S. Vygotsky, as well as analysis of historiographical sources, the features and patterns of the organization of effective scientific activity are revealed. For more information about the methods, procedure and results of the study, see: ^[4;5;6].

The study revealed the regularities of the implementation of the subject-logical aspect of the development of Russian psychology in the first half of the twentieth century. The importance of the research program, in particular, its experimental and practical orientation for the organization of effective activity of research teams in Soviet psychology is revealed ^[4;5;6]. The data obtained indicate that the research teams working under the leadership of V.M. Bekhterev and L.S. Vygotsky were characterized by an experimental, practical and socially-oriented research program for the study of man. Unlike them, G.I. Chelpanov's research program, although it was experimentally oriented, did not have a pronounced practical orientation, did not meet the social order of the young Soviet state to build an original Soviet psychology and its applied branches. And therefore it did not receive further development in the second half of the 1920s.

The results obtained allow us to expand the understanding of the personal, personalistic aspect of the organization of psychological science, its role in the scientific success of Russian researchers. Such a significant characteristic of the leading academic associations of Russian psychologists of the first half of the twentieth century as the possibility of developing and realizing the creative abilities of scientists in joint activities has been found. For example, when distributing the subjects of the works of members of the Psychological Seminary at Moscow University, G.I. Chelpanov took into account the individual interests and inclinations of students ^[4]. This attitude further determined the breadth of the research field of its employees – from pedology (P.P. Blonsky) and ethnopsychology (G.G. Shpet) to the psychology of visual perception (S.V. Kravkov), differential psychology (B.M. Teplov) and zoopsychology (N.N. Ladygina-Cats).

When organizing collective scientific work, L.S. Vygotsky also implemented an individual approach, encouraged the personal initiative of each scientist. So, in a letter to his employee N.G. Morozova in 1930, he wrote: "the team will not do without you. Our collective – and every collective in the true sense of the word – does not deny individualism, but relies on it. It is the same as the body relies on the organized cooperation of specialized, differentiated (i.e. individualized) organs. The collective is the cooperation of individuals. The brighter, more, more imbued with self-consciousness, i.e. they are aware of themselves as a person (and this is individualism correctly understood), the higher the collective" (cit. po.: ^{[9, p. 166]}).

The possibility of realizing the creative abilities of employees is one of the key criteria of the collective as the highest stage of development of the group, the prosocial directed activity of which mediates the interpersonal relationships of the members. The content of socially significant activities in such groups allows the abilities of each individual to be revealed; the collective becomes an environment for its self-realization in scientific activity. Leading teams of Russian psychologists solved not only cognitive, but also social, practical tasks. The orientation to the social order of the young Soviet state both in creating a new Marxist psychology and in building a system of psychological assistance for different groups of people contributed to the actualization of the cognitive and personal potential of each scientist. It should also be noted that the collective nature of the activities of Soviet scientists did not offset the personal achievements of outstanding researchers. Despite the role of collectives in the development of Soviet psychology, its main achievements have gone down in history under the names of specific scientists. And their number is measured in several tens only in the first half of the century ^[2].

Another significant personal factor in the formation of leading research teams and the realization of the research potential of the members was the personality of the leader, his abilities. We have carried out a qualitative analysis of the materials of the creative activity of scientists, written documents of a personal nature and materials characterizing the official activities of the leading organizers of Soviet psychological science G.I. Chelpanov, V.M. Bekhterev, L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinstein and B.G. Ananyev (see: ^[3]). As a result, an array of 46 official and unofficial documents containing the memories of colleagues and contemporaries about scientific work and the personality of scientists was formed. According to the results of the content analysis of the documents, the intellectual, creative, pedagogical, organizational and moral and ethical abilities of the head of the research team are highlighted. A model is proposed that combines the selected types of abilities into two blocks associated with the generation of new knowledge and with the organization of socially valuable activities of a research team.

The possibilities of historical and psychological research of the microsocial aspect of the development of scientific knowledge are associated with the characteristics of the characteristics of apprenticeship and leadership in research teams. The theoretical analysis of these phenomena was carried out by N.A. Loginova, A.V. Yurevich and others ^[2;15;18]. In the course of our historical and psychological research, based on specific empirical data, the importance of apprenticeship has been revealed not only for the professional development of a young scientist, but also for the creation and consolidation of a scientific team ^[4;5]. It was also found that the leading research teams of domestic researchers, created by G.I. Chelpanov, V.M. Bekhterev and L.S. Vygotsky, had not only a scientific, but also an educational character ^[4;5;6].

In the course of the study of the macrosocial aspect of the activities of leading research teams, we have identified the importance of such factors as the presence of a single, long-functioning organizational base of collective scientific research. In particular, as the most significant results of collective work on the basis of the Psychological Institute, created by G.I. Chelpanov back in 1912, those that were obtained and generalized by subsequent generations of scientists of the Institute under the leadership of S.L. Rubinstein in the 1940s can be named ^[4]. Such features of the development of Soviet psychology were due, among other things, to the peculiarities of Soviet scientific policy. The latter include hierarchization, planning, ideologization and orientation to national ("Soviet") identity ^[2]. These features made collective forms of training of scientific personnel and the organization of scientific research the most acceptable.

The analysis allows us to consider scientific collectives as a link in the hierarchy of the organization of psychological science. In their work, they followed the approved plans for the organization of scientific research, were focused on solving the ideological tasks assigned to Soviet science, including the construction of an original Marxist psychology. It was scientific collectives that acted simultaneously as centers of state support for science and bases for registration of scientific schools. And when Soviet science faced the challenges of the Great Patriotic War, the presence of personnel who had experience of successful collective activity both in building an original Marxist psychology and in solving practice-oriented tasks allowed us to productively solve the problems that arose ^[2]. Therefore, the active institutionalization of psychological science in the 1940s became possible not only thanks to individual outstanding psychological scientists and their organizational talents, but also the groundwork in organizing the joint work of the collectives they created.

Thus, the results of our historical and psychological research allow us to expand our understanding of the patterns of organization and development of Russian psychological science.

Heuristic possibilities of the socio-psychological theory of the collective

In turn, the history of psychology can be enriched by the heuristic possibilities of the socio-psychological theory of the collective. The foundations of the application of collective theory in socio-psychological research of scientific collectives were laid in the 1970s and 1980s in the works of employees of the Siberian Branch and the Institute of the History of Natural Science and Technology of the USSR Academy of Sciences ^[7;17;20]. Under the leadership of M.G. Yaroshevsky, work was carried out on the methodological development of problems of interdisciplinary research at the intersection of the history of psychology and social psychology of science ^[11;20].

The relevance of the appeal to scientific collectives in historical and psychological research is connected with the possibilities of researching the organization of Soviet psychological science and practice. A promising direction in the development of the history of Soviet psychology is the study of the activities of leading research teams. Under the leading scientific team, we understand an organizationally formed collective subject of socially significant cognitive activity, united by the content of the research program under the guidance of an outstanding scientist. The formation of Soviet psychology took place in the conditions of the socialist orientation of scientific policy and the introduction of collective ways of organizing activities. Therefore, the prosocial orientation of research activities of research teams to fulfill a social order in the construction of Soviet experimental science and practical assistance systems, as well as the embeddedness of the collective subject of scientific knowledge in the system, allow us to consider the activities of the leading research team as a unit of analysis of the organization of science in the conditions of Soviet scientific policy.

A specific form of collective realization of the logic of the development of science are scientific schools, which represent the unity of communication, learning and cognition. While the goal of the collective is to solve a socially significant task, the goal of the scientific school is scientific knowledge, the search for truth. The goals of these associations do not contradict, but complement each other. Scientific collectives are a form of organization of science, which, first of all, is focused on fulfilling the social order that exists in society in relation to science. As the preliminary results of the study of the leading research teams in Russian psychology of the first half of the twentieth century show, in their composition they did not coincide with the boundaries of scientific schools. Scientific schools mainly arose on the basis of several collectives, whose composition and research topics were characterized by continuity.

As shown in our studies ^[4;5;6], the work of leading teams of scientists-psychologists of the first third of the twentieth century. contributed to the realization of personal aspects of the development of science, research potential and methodological attitudes of their leaders in solving socially significant practical tasks. Moreover, even after the death of the head, for example, L.S. Vygotsky, they continued to develop his ideas in the course of joint work in the field of child and pedagogical psychology, defectology, neuropsychology and pathopsychology ^[6]. This shows the unity of collective and individual creativity in the development of psychological cognition, presented in the works of V.A. Koltsova as one of the principles of the history of psychology. In the conditions of "big science", a scientist cannot be a loner in science, he always acts as a member of a research group. Therefore, the study of the personal aspect of scientific knowledge is inevitably associated with the study of the role of a scientist in a scientific group, as well as his socio-psychological qualities and abilities.

Appeal to the analysis of collective forms of social the organization of science highlights the importance of scientific associations for the productive implementation of research programs of leading Russian psychologists. For example, experimental-oriented research programs led by V.M. Bekhterev, G.I. Chelpanov and L.S. Vygotsky assumed the work of research teams on the bases of scientific institutes. Namely, the Psychoneurological Institute, the Institute for the Study of the Brain and Mental Activity, the Psychological Institute in Moscow, the Experimental Defectological Institute, the All-Union Institute of Experimental Medicine, etc. The collected experimental data were used to develop general psychological concepts of the authors, in particular, "reflexology" by V.M. Bekhterev, "empirical psychology" by G.I. Chelpanov, theoretical foundations of general psychology in the scientific school of L.S. Vygotsky. These authors were the first organizers of psychological science and education in Russia, who actively appreciated the importance of collective work at the stage of the formation of psychology as a "big science" in the first half of the twentieth century (for more information, see: ^[4;5;6]).

The current situation of the development of science to an even greater extent requires socio-psychological concepts to explain the patterns of organization and self-organization of scientific knowledge. It stimulates the comprehension of the achievements of domestic psychology of the Soviet period from the standpoint of the theory of the collective. This puts the scientific concept of "collective" among the promising scientific categories in line not only and not so much with social psychology as with the history of Russian psychology, designed to describe and explain the principles of effective organization of Soviet psychology.

Conclusion

Possession of the modern methodological apparatus of historical and psychological research allows conducting relevant comprehensive studies of the development and organization of psychological cognition. The prospects of interdisciplinary research are connected with the possibilities, on the one hand, of historical and psychological research to solve the problems of social psychology of science, as well as the application of the socio-psychological theory of the collective to understand the patterns of development of scientific psychological knowledge, on the other. The appeal to the process-dynamic aspect of psychological cognition expands the possibilities of interdisciplinary dialogue and mutual enrichment in the field of both psychological and broader humanities and social sciences.

Preliminary results of the study of the formation and development of the leading collectives of Soviet psychology at the stage of its institutionalization indicate the importance of external and internal determinants of effective scientific activity, as well as their relationship. In terms of the organization of modern psychological science, the data obtained allow us to draw conclusions about the importance of a supportive scientific policy, consideration by researchers of the social order in relation to psychology, practical orientation and continuity in the development of a research program, the dependence of the implementation of methodological guidelines of a leading scientist on the presence of a research team; the importance of not only organizational, mental and creative, but also pedagogical and moral and ethical abilities of the head of the research team, as well as the possibility of realizing and developing the research potential of scientists-members of the team.

The results obtained are consistent and complement the data of other modern studies conducted in line with the social psychology of science in Russia and abroad ^[18;22;23]. The application of the socio-psychological theory of the collective in historical and psychological research makes it possible to expand the understanding of the three aspects of the development of science and their relationship. In particular, as a criterion for the formation of a scientific team, the possibility of developing and realizing the creative potential of members in the course of joint activities is considered. This opportunity is achieved thanks to the active participation of the scientist's personality, the group's performance of socially significant activities and the practical orientation of scientific knowledge. This methodological approach allows us to take into account the immanent connection of the personal-psychological, social and subject-logical aspects of the development of science.

The explanatory potential of the proposed approach is due to the relevance of the theoretical and methodological foundations of research not only to the studied historical and psychological reality, but also to the concepts of domestic authors - historians of psychology and social psychologists who proposed similar research interpretations in the Soviet period (see, for example: ^[8;10]).

The study of the history of psychology as a process that is created not only by individual scientists, but also by their collective associations to solve socially significant research and practical tasks opens up the possibility of applying retrospective knowledge to understand the present, forecasting and organizing the future of psychology. Providing opportunities for the history of psychology to realize not only cognitive, reflexive, axiological, social and organizational-scientific functions, but also integrative, prognostic and stimulating the progressive development of psychological science.