This is the second volume of A Social Psychology from Central America. Although five years have passed since the publication of the first volume, this work maintains the same perspective and, most importantly, strives toward the same goals. Above all, it attempts to develop a social psychology which combines scientific rigor with social responsibility, one which benefits from a wealth of knowledge amassed in other places and with other concerns in mind, but which ultimately recasts it critically in light of the problems Central-American peoples face in these last decades of the 20th century. Thus, this is a text in dialogue with the ruling paradigm within social psychology, which is essentially North-American. Certainly, the North-American tradition has offered much good as the product of nearly a century of work, and I hope that this fact does not escape the reader; however, it has done more than a little harm, not so much for what it is as such, but what it claims to be: a knowledge which is universally valid and significant, despite it often being no more than gravely isolated thinking inspired by narrow-minded frameworks, and even then, it is only partially verified in conditions that are both local and abstract. Unfortunately, the crisis arising from this issue, which challenged North-American social psychology around the beginning of the 1970s, did not produce a qualitative shift from the dominant paradigm, which, after a brief moment of uncertainty, has persisted with the same or similar practices under the hegemonic perspective of “cognitive” approaches.
In this dialogue with North-American social psychology, I intend to introduce a new interlocutor, one ever silenced and too often ignored: the people as such, the popular majorities of Central America. We have forced ourselves to interrogate psychology on the issues which most affect these peoples, beginning with that of exploitation and poverty and ending with that of war, which today destroys Central America in a more or less latent form. It is from this historical perspective that the principles used to critique many of the mainstream models in the academic sphere are formed and different approaches are offered, since a constant preoccupation of this work is to point out possible errors and defects of theory while developing alternatives which, without throwing everything accomplished overboard, consult other models and developments which are more appropriate to the history Central-American peoples have lived.
It would be presumptuous and naive to claim that these two volumes constitute a new social psychology; that is not even their intent. But neither are they texts akin to those which North-American editors toss to the market every year due to commercial know-how instead of scientific necessity. The reader has opened a book which aspires to clear a path entangled with neo-positivist assumptions and the implicit interests of those in power, so that the pains and desires, the labors and hopes of our peoples can march across it. In other words, my intent resides in rescuing and revealing all that in social psychology which can contribute to the historical liberation of Central-American peoples. Perhaps this presumption is too utopian. Certainly, I do not assume that social psychology's contribution to this aim will be great or crucial, but what I do believe is that there is something which social psychology can contribute, and that what matters is knowing what and how it can do so. Toward that end, I have spoken of the necessity of realizing a liberation psychology (Martín-Baró, 1986c) which, inspired by one of the more original branches of contemporary popular praxis in Latin America, helps clear the path of history across which the peoples of our continent are trying to march today.
The response we have received to the publication of Action and Ideology has been more than stimulating. We know that in many Latin-American universities, the book has circulated as photocopies and that it has provoked some psychologists to reconsider their own psycho-social work. But what inspired us even more was the discovery that Action and Ideology was really just one fruit among many from a perspective and passion which many Latin-American social psychologists, from distant places and without shared knowledge or prior correspondence, are developing. Thus, we have come to find that in Mexico and Venezuela, in Puerto Rico and Brazil, in Costa Rica and Chile, other social psychologists have dedicated themselves to similar work, tied to the particular problems of their own peoples. Today, there exists a broader and clearer acknowledgment of each other, though there is still insufficient interaction; but now, there are common projects in the works which we hope will be the seeds of closer collaboration for the benefit of popular interests.
If there is something I should confess to the reader, it is that I have put an end to this second volume with the same unease of seeing clothes in the closet age without having worn them yet. Thus, the book has matured, but it is not quite complete. I wrote the first chapter of this book in 1984, while I completed the last one four years later in 1988. That is not at all to indicate that I have been unable to continue polishing what I have written during these years; rather, it means that the time which I have managed to free here and there for this work has been scarce and short, and that I have looked on helplessly as the manuscripts gathered dust without revision or completion. Thus there certainly will be particular inconsistencies in the work’s pacing and even in certain approaches within these five chapters, as was the case with the those of Action and Ideology. Not only can one trace the passage of time in the book's bibliographic references, but also in its choice of examples and historical allusions. Without a doubt, my interests and focus have evolved a bit. Thus, though I began thinking about families, I ended up studying unions, and what appeared to analyze universities culminated in a discussion about the army and Christian base communities.
I now think that social psychology should cultivate a political psychology as its most valuable fruit. I know that some of our North-American and European colleagues warn us about the danger of mixing science with activism, or conflating theory with political convictions. It is possible that I sometimes make that mistake. However, so many err on the side of caution more than not, and I find it preferable for me to fail in whole-hearted intent by making history as part of a people than to remain at its margin in order to maintain a pseudo-sterile disposition. The concern, though perfectly fair, should not bring anyone to inaction any more than it ought to confuse scientific rigor with a lack of options.
I pray that this second volume of a lived, theorized, and now suffered social psychology born of the very real circumstances of the Salvadoran people’s struggle and aspirations will help others to join forces toward this end: opening up the scientific and professional practice of psychology to the historical hope of our Central-American peoples.
San Salvador, 3 November 1988
Continue reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment