This paper argues that unification in the discipline of psychology cannot be achieved through appeals to objectivism or relativism. Objectivism fails because it bills itself as a value-free tool of inquiry, when in reality it is a value-laden metatheory. Relativism fails because it cannot make judgments among communities, and as such is a candidate for disunity, not unity. We argue that any attempt to unify the discipline must begin at the level of moral assumptions. Morality serves as the groun…
Read moreThis paper argues that unification in the discipline of psychology cannot be achieved through appeals to objectivism or relativism. Objectivism fails because it bills itself as a value-free tool of inquiry, when in reality it is a value-laden metatheory. Relativism fails because it cannot make judgments among communities, and as such is a candidate for disunity, not unity. We argue that any attempt to unify the discipline must begin at the level of moral assumptions. Morality serves as the ground on which evaluations of divergent discourse communities can and must take place. A disciplinary conversation is required in which various moral systems are considered as unifying strategies. We outline how a productive conversation of this sort can take place
