2 Answers

  1. In fact, there are certain guild tensions between philosophers and psychologists. Some psychologists consider philosophy to be a disease, or at least a psychological aberration, and some philosophers consider psychology to be quackery. But there is also a borderline discipline — philosophical psychology, which, however, experienced the peak of attention in the scientific community somewhere in the first third of the XX century. Nowadays, psychologists sometimes resort to philosophical methods in psychotherapy, and philosophers try to make philosophy an alternative to psychotherapy. For more information, see “About Philosophical Counseling”.

  2. No, philosophers (with a few exceptions) are not psychologists.

    Philosophers are characterized by indirect-universal and abstract-theoretical study of all the laws of the surrounding world-in the course of logical and verbal thinking. The main drawback of philosophers is due to the lack of a practical base – this is their small connection with reality. Therefore, many people perceive philosophy as something far removed from their normal life. And, not finding in the arguments of philosophers exhaustive answers to topical questions, they go to psychologists. Psychologists just study the human psyche and its activities-taking into account real experience, emotions and feelings. However, psychologists also have a vulnerability: a vague explanation of categories and hypothetical psychological definitions – with an unknown result. So a lot of people are also disappointed in psychologists.

    I believe that harmonious cooperation is required: it is desirable for a philosopher to be a psychologist, and for a psychologist to be a philosopher. This is my ideal approach. For example, the most rare exception is Anna Kiryanova: both a philosopher and a psychologist.

Leave a Reply