For a clinical psychology as an expression of scientific sense: from the hybridization of knowledge with the medical method to its placement within a precise and rigorous operative method.

Abstract

This contribution aims at outlining a strictu sensu operative psychological model. Whereas in medical field rigorous and precise correspondence between operative praxis and epistemic foundations of anatomical-functional item (research object of medical model) enables operative medical model to ground on scientific sense, this issue is still open and unresolved in psychological field. For instance, medical model distinguishes diagnostic praxis in two different typologies: certain aetiology diagnosis and uncertain aetiology diagnosis. The latter typology in particular enters into the merits of clinical case and it previously qualifies as syndromic some descriptive elements referred to the part or to the function of the anatomical-functional item involved. For instance: Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection Acquired Syndrome. Transposing this reasoning in psychological field entails running up against some cognitive holes that had and still have strong implications on Psychology action. In this field, it cannot be found any cause - as the research object has epistemic foundations of theoretical construct – and each and every clinical case should be firstly connected to an uncertain aetiology diagnosis. Secondly a diagnostic label could not be adopted but at most a description of a syndromic featured clinical case. Therefore, being a spuriously adopted praxis aimed at recovery - as medical model aims at – and grounded on cognitive notion of cause, it is scientifically wrongful ergo it is inapplicable in psyco-logos field. Therefore, according to the article arguments, the framework of interactionist paradigms make available the observation that – discursive and shaped in interaction - reality on which psyco-logos model deals with is uncertain, constantly changeable and that can be changed at every moment whatever it could be. The assumptions above described ground the definition of an operative model dealing with logos, therefore on ways of shaping reality. The criteria can be no longer referred to etiopathogenesis and, consequently, the objective of operative model is not recovery but rather change of discursive configuration.