The subjective approach in the study of regional psychology

Artemeva Ol'ga Arkadjevna ORCID: 0000-0002-0093-0166 Doctor of Psychology Professor of the Department of General Psychology, Head of the Laboratory of Methodology and History of Psychology, Irkutsk State University 664025, Russia, Irkutsk, Chkalova str., 2, office 205 oaartemeva@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Shikun Aleksei Alekseevich PhD in Psychology Applicant, Department of General Psychology, of Irkutsk State University 664025, Russia, Irkutsk region, Irkutsk, Chkalova str., 2, room 205 a.a.shikun@mail.ru

Despite the growing research interest, one of the least developed aspects of the history of Russian psychology remains the history of regional psychology (see: ^[1],[2]). Meanwhile, the contribution of psychologists who received education, started their professional activities and worked in regional centers is significant. He is associated with the names of such outstanding scientists as V.M. Bekhterev, G.I. Chelpanov, L.S. Vygotsky, S.L. Rubinstein, A.R. Luria, B.G. Ananyev and others. Regional psychologists not only replenish the number of leading psychologists in the country, working in the capital's research centers, but also implement applied and practical activities in the regions, provide in-demand psychological assistance.

The development of regional psychology has its own specifics associated with unique socio-cultural features and patterns of development, a place in the development of national and global psychology ^{[3],[4],[5],[6],[7]}. The areas of work of regional psychologists are largely determined by the demands of local politics, economics and culture (see: ^[2],[8]). In this regard, there is a need to analyze the development of psychological science, education and practice in limited administrative entities (krai, oblast, district, republic) in historical development. The conditionality of the development of psychological science by social determinants is manifested in the importance of the social order as the most important condition for the development of regional psychology. The specificity of the development of regional psychology in comparison with national psychology determines the relevance of the problem of developing the theoretical and methodological foundations of its historical and psychological research.

The development of regional psychology is a complex phenomenon and requires research not only on determination, but also on the dynamics of the development of psychology, and, most importantly, on the subject of psychological cognition in the region. The development of psychological science and practice is carried out not only and not so much by specific psychologists, but by their associations, such as the center for practical psychology, laboratory, department. The emergence of such associations in the regions is always associated with the presence of a social order for solving specific regional tasks. Therefore, leading regional psychologists are always included in the activities of the regional psychological community and certain regional organizations, forming a single collective subject of psychological cognition. This article is devoted to the definition of the methodological foundations for the implementation of the subjective approach in the historical and psychological study of the development of regional psychology.

Let's define the methodological foundations for the implementation of the subjective approach at four levels of the methodology of historical and psychological research, highlighted by V.A. Koltsova: 1) philosophical, epistemological and ontological; 2) general scientific, scientific; 3) specially scientific; 4) specifically scientific.

The philosophical and epistemological level of methodology is associated with the realization of the idea of the subject of cognition as a conscious and active initiator of cognition interacting with mental reality as an object of cognition (see: ^{[9, p. 49]}), about the dialectical connection of the subject with objective reality ^{[9, p. 51]}. Already at this basic level of methodology, the category of the subject is defined as the central category of cognition.

The general scientific, scientific level of methodology is revealed through approaches to the definition of the concept of "the subject of knowledge". A significant contribution to its development in philosophy and the history of science was made by the famous scientist, theorist and historian of psychology M.G. Yaroshevsky. The author devoted a number of scientific works to the problem of the subject of scientific knowledge. The article "On the genesis of the subject of cognition" presents such levels of the systemic organization of the collective subject of scientific cognition as the scientific community, the scientific and social circle, the primary research team ^[10].

In addition, the theoretical and methodological basis for determining the levels of the subject of psychological cognition in our study is the scientific ideas of A.V. Yurevich about the levels of scientific activity. The author considers the determination of the development of psychological science at the following levels: intrapersonal, personal, levels of a small group, scientific organization, scientific society and society as a whole ^[11].

The special scientific level of the methodology of historical and psychological research is represented by the principles of humanitarian research, including general psychological principles, approaches and theories. In the study of regional psychology as a collective subject, the principles of the subject and consistency act as such principles.

The theoretical and methodological foundations for the implementation of the principle of the subject in the course of psychological research of scientific knowledge and activity are laid, first of all, in the works of S.L. Rubinstein and A.V. Brushlinsky. For S.L. Rubinstein, the subject is a doer, a creator capable of transforming reality, self–movement, self-activity, self-development ^[12]. The principle of the subject presupposes the overcoming of causal determination, the study of the subject as active, self-determined, self-organizing.

For S.L. Rubinstein, scientific knowledge is inseparable from the subject. The path of scientific search is presented as a critical understanding and transformation, "cognition as a change of what is" ^{[13, p. 334]}, based on the current standards of scientific research. This allows S.L. Rubinstein to talk about the sociality of science, the "socialization" of scientific knowledge. In addition, the author notes the collective nature of the subject of scientific knowledge, which overcomes the "isolation of the individual, the separatism of individual worlds" ^{[13, p. 332]}, ensuring the objectivity of the research. A scientist, for S.L. Rubinstein, is a creator, a subject of scientific knowledge, aware of the being he knows in socially and historically formed forms ^[13]. Thus, the use of the concept of "collective subject" in the study of regional psychology allows us to focus on both the collective and social nature of the subject of knowledge; moreover, on the social significance of the scientific knowledge carried out by him.

The tradition of developing the category "subject", laid down in the works of S.L. Rubinstein, continues A.V. Brushlinsky. The subject, for the authors, is the one who is not only discovered, but also defined in creative self–activity ^[14]. Continuing S.L. Rubinstein's ideas about the sociality of science and the objectivity of scientific knowledge, A.V. Brushlinsky speaks about the objectivity, independence of the content of ideas from the subject that generates them: "the independence of their content from the subject is determined by their dependence on the being reflected by them" ^{[14, p. 16]}.

The principle of consistency, developed in psychology by B.F. Lomov ^[21], is revealed in the field of the history of psychology by V.A. Koltsova. The main directions of its implementation in the history of psychology are the study of the development of psychological cognition as multidimensional, multidimensional, multilevel, taking into account the systemic determination of psychological cognition ^[9]. The multidimensional nature of psychological cognition is considered through the characterization of the subject-logical, socio-historical, personalistic and procedural-dynamic aspects of its development. The multilevel nature of psychological cognition in research can be realized through the characterization of the levels of the collective subject of cognition. The multidimensionality of studying the process of cognition – in the course of researching various products of cognitive activity (monographs, textbooks, articles, etc.), events of scientific life (conferences, scientific reports, problem seminars, etc.), the contribution and place of the results of cognition in science, practice, economics, culture. A systematic analysis of the determination of the development of psychological cognition includes an analysis of the prerequisites, conditions and factors of the development of psychology.

The importance of a holistic approach in the systematic study of the subject is emphasized by A.V. Brushlinsky. The approach developed by the scientist reflects the provisions of the works of S.L. Rubinstein and B.F. Lomov.  Integrity, according to the author, reflects the unity of activity and all types of activity of the subject. Moreover, the consistency of both an individual and a group subject is considered by him as the basis of cognition during the development of theory, experiment and application of research results in practice; as the basis of "inextricable interrelations of theory, empiricism and practice" in the process of cognitive activity development ^{[14, p. 23]}. "It is the theory of activity (initially practical, then also theoretical, but in principle unified), according to the author, that reveals and asserts the organic unity of experiment and practice" ^{[14, p. 23]}.

The implementation of the principle of unity of theory, experiment and practice, justified by B.F. Lomov ^[21], allows us to reveal the dependence of scientific knowledge on the practice of its subject: in the case of an individual subject – on the experience of a particular researcher, in the case of a collective one – on public practice and social order (see: ^[15]).

The study of regional psychology requires the implementation of the principle of hierarchy in the course of describing the collective subject of psychological cognition. The principle of hierarchy is proposed in Soviet psychology in the context of the implementation of the principle of consistency. He prescribes the analysis of a psychological phenomenon as a system whose levels are in hierarchical subordination relationships. The methodological foundations for the application of the principle are presented in the works of K.K. Platonov ^[19] and D.E. Zavalishina ^[20]. The principle of hierarchy is implemented in the research of the individual and the group, in particular, during the construction of the concept of integral individuality by V.S. Merlin, the dispositional concept of behavior regulation by V.A. Yadov, the stratometric concept of the development of a small group by V.A. Petrovsky.

The works of A.V. Brushlinsky contain an idea of the level character of the subject, which includes interacting subjects of different scales. For the author, "in the fullest and broadest sense of the word, the subject is the whole of humanity as a whole, representing a contradictory systemic unity of subjects of different scales: states, nations, ethnic groups, social classes and groups, individuals interacting with each other" ^{[16, pp. 19-20]}.

The creative development of the ideas of S.L. Rubinstein and B.F. Lomov allows A.V. Brushlinsky to propose criteria of the subject. Among them, you can find the following: 1) highlighting and contrasting oneself with the surrounding reality, acting as an object of cognition and action; 2) a creative approach manifested in the construction of new concepts; 3) interrelation with other subjects; 4) unity, integrity of the subject's activity and all types of his activity (see: ^[14],[17]).

The perspective of the subjective approach in understanding the patterns of effective organization and self–organization of regional psychology is associated with the identification not so much of different types of determination of science – personal and social, as the principle that defines the entire system of determination - the principle of the subject. The level-based subjective approach is especially promising when directly addressing the process of development of scientific knowledge, the facts of its history. The criteria of the subject highlighted by A.V. Brushlinsky can be used to study the dynamics of the formation of the subject of scientific activity not only at the level of personality, but also at the overlying levels of the collective subject.

The methodological foundations of the subjective approach in the study of the collective are laid in the works of A. L. Zhuravlev, who identified such properties of a collective subject as: integrity (interconnectedness and interdependence of members) of the collective, the ability of employees to be active together and to self-reflection. The most important basis for the study of the dynamics of collective forms of the organization of science is A.L. Zhuravlev's idea of the levels and stages of a collective subject. These are levels with characteristic properties such as: 1) potential subjectivity or pre-subjectivity (subjectivity as the interconnectedness and interdependence of a set of individuals); 2) proper subjectivity or real subjectivity (subjectivity as joint activity); 3) reflective subjectivity (subjectivity as group self-reflexivity) ^[18].

The specific scientific level of the methodology of historical and psychological research is determined by the set of principles of the history of psychology as a scientific discipline. The main historical and psychological principle that implements the idea of the levels of the collective subject of psychological cognition is the principle of unity of collective and individual creativity in the development of psychological cognition. He warns "against the absolutization of the contribution of an individual scientist or scientific school to the formation of cumulative psychological knowledge" and assumes "an understanding of the history of psychology as the result of the activities of not only individual scientists, but also the scientific community as a whole" ^{[9, p. 156]}.

During the implementation of the subjective approach to the study of the development of Soviet psychology, O.A. Artemyeva developed an idea of the levels of the collective subject of scientific knowledge. Among them are the levels of society, the scientific community, scientific groups (scientific organization and primary research team), the scientific and social circle of the scientist. The system-forming level in this hierarchical system is the level of the scientific community ^[15].

The results of the theoretical analysis and historical and psychological research of the development of regional psychology in the Tver region allowed us to distinguish among the levels of the regional collective subject of psychological cognition: 1) the micro-level of the primary research team (department, laboratory); 2) the meso-level of the scientific and educational organization; 3) the macro-level of the regional psychological community.

Specific collective subjects in Tver psychology were: 1) at the macro level – regional branches of All–Union and All-Russian societies (Kalinin Lecture Bureau, regional branches of the society "Knowledge", the Russian Psychological Society); 2) at the meso-level - such scientific and educational organizations as Tver State University (TvSU), Military Command Academy of Air Defense (VKA Air Defense) of Kalinin, Interdepartmental the Center for Ergonomic Research and Development in military equipment, etc.; 3) at the micro level - research teams of the Department of Psychology of the TvSU, the All-Union Scientific Research Laboratory of the VKA Air Defense, the Crisis Center of the regional clinical Neuropsychiatric Dispensary, the Tver Regional Center for Psychological, Pedagogical, Medical and Social Assistance "Family", etc.

The level of a scientific and educational organization is singled out as the system-forming level of a regional collective entity. It is the scientific and educational organization that creates, forms the structure, manages, fills the budget of the primary research team under the social order received from the authorities, and in case of closure of the project disbands this unit. Thus, the effective work of specialized psychological laboratories, the special faculty, the Department of Psychology and later the Faculty of Psychology was established at TvSU. Already on their basis, various forms of training were implemented, which served as the basis for the creation of a scientific and pedagogical school in the field of scientific, pedagogical and psychological foundations of continuous multi-level education under the leadership of A.F. Shikun ^[2].

The application of the principle of unity of collective and individual creativity is associated with the implementation of other principles of historical and psychological research, highlighted by V.A. Koltsova. First of all, the principle of periodization and continuity in the development of psychological cognition and the principle of constructive-positive analysis (see: ^[9]).

The principle of periodization and continuity in the development of psychological knowledge aims at identifying qualitatively different periods of development of regional psychology, establishing logical connections in the development of a single process of psychological cognition. As a basis for the development of periodization, the idea of the stadial nature of the development of a collective subject, realized by O.A. Artemyeva in the analysis of the development of domestic psychology in the first half of the twentieth century and the identification of the stages of pre-subjectivity, the emerging and developed subject of scientific knowledge, can be used ^[4],[15].

The principle of constructive-positive analysis of the history of psychology involves "focusing the researcher's attention not on the weaknesses and shortcomings of the system of knowledge under study, but on identifying, first of all, the positive and constructive ideas and approaches contained in it", which, "however, does not mean abandoning the realism of the scientific assessment of the past, including its critical moments" (Koltsova, 2004, p. 155). The study of the development of regional psychology at different levels of a collective subject avoids exaggeration and leveling of the personalistic and socio-historical aspects of the development of science. To consider the dependence of the scientific activity of psychologists and their teams on the social order not as a cause-and-effect determination, but as the self-organization of the subject of psychological cognition (see: ^[4],[15]).

Conclusions

The analysis allows us to determine the methodological foundations for the implementation of the subjective approach in the historical and psychological study of the development of regional psychology. The philosophical and epistemological foundations of the implementation of the subjective approach in the study of regional psychology are associated with the definition of the philosophical category of the subject as an active figure and creator. The main contribution to the definition of the methodological foundations of the scientific research of the collective subject of scientific activity was made by M.G. Yaroshevsky and his students. A promising direction of its implementation in relation to the study of the history of regional psychology is the idea of the levels of the collective subject of scientific knowledge. The foundations of the psychological development of ideas about the subject of scientific activity and cognition are laid in the works of S.L. Rubinstein and A.V. Brushlinsky.

The most important basis for the study of the dynamics of collective forms of the organization of science are A.L. Zhuravlev's ideas about the levels and stages of a collective subject, implemented in the historical and psychological studies of the development of domestic psychology by O.A. Artemyeva. The implementation of the principle of the subject involves overcoming causal determination, the study of the collective subject as active, self-determined and self-organizing. The application in the history of psychology of the general scientific principle of consistency and specifically scientific principles of hierarchy and unity of theory, experiment and practice allows us to reveal the dependence of scientific knowledge on the practice of its subject and to study the development of regional psychology as a multidimensional, multidimensional and multilevel process, taking into account its systemic determination.

In addition, the methodological basis for the implementation of the subjective approach at the specific scientific level of historical and psychological research is determined by the principles of unity of collective and individual creativity in the development of psychological cognition, periodization and continuity in the development of psychological knowledge and constructive and positive analysis of the history of psychology, highlighted and substantiated by V.A. Koltsova.

The results of the theoretical analysis made it possible to develop and implement a program of historical and psychological reconstruction of the history of regional psychology in the Tver region as the formation and development of a regional collective subject of psychological cognition at the levels of the primary research team, scientific and educational organization and regional psychological community. To identify and characterize the levels and dynamics of the development of a regional collective subject of psychological cognition in the Tver region.