The ongoing debate about psychology's status as a science involves questions about the nature of consciousness, and the proper methodology for studying it. A comparison of Freud and Jung's theories of dream interpretation is the
starting point for a discussion of contrasting methodologies. Philosophical traditions are explored that offer alternative views. An experimental-behaviorist paradigm is contrasted with a phenomenological-humanistic paradigm. The peculiar nature of consciousness, its reflexivity, highlights the need for a special methodology. Dialectical constructs are offered as contributing to a method that "best-fits" the subject matter. Comparisons are made between this alternative method and several sub-disciplines: developmental psychology, object relations, and classical psychoanalytic drive theory. These sub-disciplines are taken from the literature as ones that best exemplify the use of dialectical constructs. The dissertation ends with a comparison of the practical implications from each paradigm for the therapeutic role of empathy, a construct deemed essential to the therapeutic process by several authors.
Files are restricted to Pacific University. Sign in to view.