The Illusion of Objectivity: Toward a Philosophically Transparent Redefinition of Modern Psychology

This paper presents a foundational critique of modern clinical and theoretical psychology, challenging its self-conception as a value-neutral, objective science analogous to physics or chemistry. By investigating the intersection of the philosophy of science, ethics, and psychiatric history, the author argues that psychological constructs—such as mental disorders, intelligence, and trauma—are not discovered natural facts but culturally situated inventions inherently entangled with normative moral judgments. The critique is structured around three primary domains of empirical and systematic evidence: the historical contingency of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) classifications, the systemic limitations of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) sampling biases, and the structural implications of the replication crisis. Integrating Ian Hacking’s concept of the "looping effect of human kinds," the paper demonstrates why the subject matter of psychology remains an unstable, interactive target. Furthermore, applying David Hume’s is-ought problem, the text exposes how clinical psychology covertly relies on unstated utilitarian-materialist axioms to define human "health" and "maladaptiveness." Rather than proposing a standardized or centralized regulatory framework, the paper concludes with a radical, pluralistic reformulation: a "marketplace of teloi." Under this model, psychological practices must abandon pretensions of objectivity, demanding instead that practitioners explicitly state their foundational philosophical and teleological commitments, allowing for true alignment and informed consent between clinician and patient.