Is There a Marxist Psychology?

Abstract

We do not want a brand-new and trivial name from history. We want a name covered by the dust of centuries. We regard this as our historical right, as an indication of our historical role, our claim to realize psychology as a science. We must view ourselves in connection with and in relation to the past … That is why we accept the name of our science with all its age-old delusions as a vivid reminder of our victory over these errors, as the fighting scars of wounds, as a vivid testimony of the truth which develops in the incredibly complicated struggle with falsehood. (Vygotsky, 1927/1997a: 336–337) La psychologie ne détient donc nullement le “secret” des faits humains, simplement parce que ce “secret” n'est pas d'ordre psychologique [Psychology by no means holds the “secret” of human affairs, simply because this “secret” is not of a psychological order]. (Politzer, 1928: 170) Pourquoi la théorie? Comme le plus court chemin vers la realité. (Verret, 1999: 10) INTRODUCTION Vygotsky, whose premature death occurred at the age of thirty-seven in 1934, was a serious loss to Marxist psychology. He will be remembered for three things. Firstly, he played a major part in reviving the Marxist approach to psychology, which had been suppressed by the positivism–scientism versions of Marxism. Secondly, in his major works, Vygotsky made a positive and original application of Marx's method, which in Marx's works often suffered from vulgar dialectical materialism.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.