Perspectivas epistemológicas em Psicoterapia (I): Filosofia da ciência, psicologia e psicoterapia

Abstract

In this first half of the paper, the author reflects on the reasons behind the insulation that has been characterizing the relationships between philosophy or science/epistemology and psychology/psychotherapy. It is argued that this relationship has been non-reciprocal in the sense that only philosophy of science has been influencing psychology/psychotherapy through the doctrine of «logical positivism». It is also argued that thanks to the fallacy of «logical positivism» as well as the appearance of «psychology of science» and «non-justificational philosophies» it is possible to inaugurate reciprocity between the two disciplines at both a methodological and conceptual level. Verifying the existence of three recent psychotherapeutic models that can be seen in the context of the relationships between philosophy of science and psychotherapy, the author puts forward four unifying characteristics: 1) they all use as background frameworks borrowed from philosophy of science and epistemology; 2) they take explicitly into consideration the way individuals acquire, organize maintain and modify their knowledge; 3) they reject the existence of «ultimate epistemological authorities»; 4) they adopt the perspective of «motor theories of mind» as well as a constructivism view of human functioning. This part of the paper ends with the description and analysis of the first of the three mentioned models, M. J. Mahoney’s. The author stresses as Mahoney’s theoretical tenets: a) a «constructivist ontology» - the active role played by individuals when constructing the sensorial information to which they respond; b) the «primacy of meaning» - the importance of the personal meaning of events as related to the relationships between order and contrast; c) «heterarchial structuralism» - decentralization and changing coalitions among CNS Knowledge systems; d) «oscillations and emotions» - the importance of oscillatory processes understood as dynamic tensions between contrasts that superordinate the emotional ones. Regarding the therapeutic process, Mahoney argues for the use of multimodal assessment methodologies and an intervention based on T. Kuhn’s analysis of scientific change and progress.