The Inner World of Man: is the Subject of Psychology the Unified (Invitation to Discussion)

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of the concept of the inner world of a person, which is positioned as a possible unified subject of psychology. The concepts of the inner world and the subjectivety are compared in the context of modern concepts. It is argued that the inner world is rather an integrative concept that reflects current trends towards general models. The issue of possible allocation of a unified subject of psychology and the creation of a universal methodology is considered. The possibilities of implementing the basic principles and tasks of the integrative-communicative approach are considered. It is shown that postulating a unified subject of psychology — the inner world of a person, his architectonics (three levels: individual, subject of activity, personality), the cardinal problems of the relationship between biological and social, the psychophysiological problem, do not find their consistent solution. It seems that the concept of the inner world of a person, as well as a subject, is a reflection of the trend in the development of modern concepts towards more and more integrative ones, compressed into a system-network organization, implicitly containing many other conceptual constructs. Various points of view on this issue are given and the impossibility of reducing the whole variety of approaches and theories to a unified methodology is demonstrated. This does not mean that only integrative concepts should become a unified subject of psychological science. The evolutionary changes taking place both in the development of modern concepts and in the development of scientific schools and approaches testify to the significant dynamics taking place in our science, the desire for dialogue and understanding, that the key to the development of science is rather the diversity and diversity of subjects, methods, approaches, assuming a common interest in the exchange of opinions and the search for scientific criteria of knowledge. This creates a general landscape for the development of science both in the “tree” and in the “bush”, becoming the driving force behind the development of science. This work raises controversial issues, inviting to their discussion and dialogue.