Thomas Teo

Critical psychology: A geography of intellectual engagement and resistance.

Critical psychology has become a generative and international movement in the last 5 decades, with self-identifying critical psychologists emerging from around the globe with publications and contributions, both theoretical and practical, in many areas of psychology. This article provides an overview of current trends in critical psychology and elucidates historical sources and theoretical tenets. Presented are the relationship between individual subjectivity and society, the role of power in the discipline, the problem of subjectification, the importance of reflexivity and intersubjectivity in the context of research practices, methodologies of change for different contexts, and the ethical-political positions from which critical psychologists operate. Challenges to critical psychology, which include engagements with indigenous psychologies, new forms of internationalization, and advancing transdisciplinary work, are discussed.

Agnotology in the dialectics of the history and philosophy of psychology

It is suggested that Robinson’s (2013) arguments are based on a less than clear articulation of the relationship between the history and philosophy of psychology. After tackling the relationship between these two subdisciplines and conceptualizing them in a dialectic relationship from a programmatic point of view, consequences for writing and reading works in the history and philosophy of psychology are examined. Lessons learned from the reflections suggest that there are inherent conflicts between the two subdisciplines, that the history of psychology needs to reflect on its implicit assumptions as well as on relevance, and that the substance of philosophical psychology can be improved when an historical perspective is taken. Consequences for a critical history and philosophy of psychology are discussed.

Backlash against American psychology: an indigenous reconstruction of the history of German critical psychology.

After suggesting that all psychologies contain indigenous qualities and discussing differences and commonalities between German and North American historiographies of psychology, an indigenous reconstruction of German critical psychology is applied. It is argued that German critical psychology can be understood as a backlash against American psychology, as a response to the Americanization of German psychology after WWII, on the background of the history of German psychology, the academic impact of the Cold War, and the trajectory of personal biographies and institutions. Using an intellectual-historical perspective, it is shown how and which indigenous dimensions played a role in the development of German critical psychology as well as the limitations to such an historical approach. Expanding from German critical psychology, the role of the critique of American psychology in various contexts around the globe is discussed in order to emphasize the relevance of indigenous historical research.

From psychological science to the psychological humanities: Building a general theory of subjectivity.

The development of psychology as a science and the struggle for scientific recognition has disrupted the need to interrogate the discipline and the profession from the perspective of the humanities, the arts, and the concept-driven social sciences. This article suggests that some of the humanities contribute significantly to an understanding of human subjectivity, arguably a core topic within psychology. The article outlines the relevance of the psychological humanities by reclaiming subjectivity as a core topic for general psychology that is grounded in theoretical reconstruction, integration, and advancement. The argument relies on a variety of disciplines to achieve a deeper understanding of subjectivity: Philosophy provides conceptual clarifications and guidelines for integrating research on subjectivity; history reconstructs the movement of subjectivity and its subdivisions; political and social theories debate the process of subjectification; indigenous, cultural, and postcolonial studies show that Western theories of subjectivity cannot be applied habitually to contexts outside of the center; the arts corroborate the idea that subjective imagination is core to the aesthetic project; and science and technology studies point to recent developments in genetic science and information technology, advances that necessitate the consideration of significant changes in subjectivity. The implications of the psychological humanities as an important, justifiable tradition in psychology and for a general theory of subjectivity are discussed.

Subjectivity, Aesthetics, and the Nexus of Injustice: From Traditional to Street Art

In discussing various forms of struggles, three different types of injustices are highlighted and related to subjectivity and the arts. It is argued that in neoliberal societies these struggles and injustices have become intertwined to the degree that agentic socio-subjectivity is no longer experienced or conceptualized. Admitting that art embodies neoliberal contradictions and often supports the status quo, the possibilities and limitations of aesthetics are reflected. Art’s critical agenda is portrayed through examples regarding economic–political injustices and injustices of representation, recognition, interaction, and subjectification in the visual and performing arts. Aesthetic conditions for the possibility of resistance in the arts are presented with the conclusion that street art may be a better candidate for challenging the status quo than traditional art.