Academic Journal
Against the racialization of reason: Science as a universal method of problem-solving.
| Τίτλος: | Against the racialization of reason: Science as a universal method of problem-solving. |
|---|---|
| Συγγραφείς: | O'Donohue W; Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, United States. Electronic address: williamodonohue@yahoo.com. |
| Πηγή: | Current opinion in psychology [Curr Opin Psychol] 2026 Oct; Vol. 71, pp. 102329. Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 May 30. |
| Τύπος έκδοσης: | Journal Article; Review |
| Γλώσσα: | English |
| Στοιχεία περιοδικού: | Publisher: Elsevier Country of Publication: Netherlands NLM ID: 101649136 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2352-2518 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 2352250X NLM ISO Abbreviation: Curr Opin Psychol Subsets: MEDLINE |
| Imprint Name(s): | Original Publication: Amsterdam : Elsevier, [2015]- |
| Ιατρικοί όροι (MeSH): | Psychology*/methods , Problem Solving* , Science* , Knowledge* , Research Design*, Humans |
| Περίληψη: | A growing body of critical scholarship in psychology contends that its standard research methods, including randomized controlled trials, correlational designs, and psychometric measurement, are intrinsically rooted in White, Western, or colonial epistemologies and therefore function as mechanisms of epistemic exclusion/oppression and structural racism. These claims extend beyond concerns about unequal participation to argue that scientific rationality itself is epistemically and morally compromised. This paper critically examines such arguments, evaluates their epistemic coherence, and defends the rational foundations of scientific psychology's methods. Drawing on meta-scientific and philosophical work, particularly Popper's evolutionary epistemology and Laudan's problem-solving account of rationality, the paper argues that the legitimacy of research methods does not depend on their social or cultural origins, but rather on their openness to criticism, their capacity for error correction, and their demonstrated effectiveness in solving problems. While decolonial critiques appropriately highlight historical injustices and institutional failures within psychology, they frequently conflate the social genealogy of scientific practices with their epistemic validity. The paper further argues that proposed methodological replacements have not yet demonstrated comparable epistemic grounding or problem-solving productivity. (Copyright © 2026 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.) |
| Competing Interests: | Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. |
| Contributed Indexing: | Keywords: Decolonial; Epistemology; Racism; Rationality; Science; Scientific method; Whiteness |
| Entry Date(s): | Date Created: 20260609 Date Completed: 20260804 Latest Revision: 20260804 |
| Update Code: | 20260805 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.copsyc.2026.102329 |
| PMID: | 42263428 |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: | MEDLINE |
| ISSN: | 2352-2518 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.copsyc.2026.102329 |