Response to Orange, Botticelli, Soldz, and Hollander

Abstract

Each of the main issues raised by the four commentators are addressed. First, Orange’s recognition of the vital importance of the hermeneutic concept of dialogue and its effect on political change is considered. Next, Botticelli’s skepticism about the connections between learning and decisive action, and between moral understandings and political activity is discussed. Soldz’ interpretation that APA leaders were self-delusional rather than conscious conspirators and his strong arguments for developing a disciplinary telos for psychology and a Truth Commission regarding psy practitioners’ involvement in security sector operations are examined. Finally, Hollander’s exploration of how state sponsored torture terrifies and silences the population of the country perpetrating the torture, thus causing the bystander phenomenon, is discussed. Dispersed throughout the Response is a continuation of my argument about the pressing need to reconstruct APA’s curricular requirements by adding philosophical, historical, and relational material in order to aid in re-moralizing psychology.

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 — 0 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.