Comparing two major approaches to unifying psychology: Different goals, different outcomes

Henriques has developed a unified, synthetic approach to the fragmentation in psychology that is meta-psychological, philosophical, meta-view in nature. This synthetic model includes concepts such as the tree of knowledge, justification system, behavioral investment, and the influence matrix. Further, Henriques developed a unified psychotherapy and related approach that included five character adaptation systems, the wheel of development, the nested model of well-being, and psychological mindfulness. He includes the concept of “mental behaviorism” as a bridge for the field. This article describes the Henriques model briefly. Young’s approach to unifying psychology and psychotherapy is elaborated greatly in this article. It works from the premise that all sub-disciplines in psychology focus on causality in one way or another, and that they can be characterized as having common causal elements. He developed an integrated lifespan developmental model based on his Neo-Piagetian and Neo-Eriksonian models, another unifying aspect of the model. The article greatly elaborates this unifying psychology model and, as well, presents new concepts related to it. The article asks and responds to the following questions: Is unifying psychology possible, or is the field too fragmented? Is causality a worthy axis on which to base the unification of psychology? Is it contradictory to attempt to unify psychology under the rubric of causality with disparate causal theories? Should grand theories in psychology’s past serve in unifying psychology? Should the unification of psychology include the unification of psychopathology? Can Young’s unified psychology model be applied beyond psychology? The approaches taken by Henriques and Young to unifying psychology are complementary as much as different.