Abstract
The equivocal nature of the psychological institution. For a start it is supposed that "Psychological questions", since they are related to the behavioral moment or plane of the organism's adaptive relationship to the environment, form an internal part of Biology. But if it is the case, then it appears as something problematic the formation of the "Psychology" as a discipline that intends to organize itself methodologically and thematically in his own or autonomous way upon these questions considering them in some way separated from the only context within however they seem to have an own or specific sense, that is, the Bio(psycho)logical field. In this work it is intended to argue that the factors responsible of the "Psychology" field formation, as a separated or autonomous field -with respect to Biology-, are of anthropological type, and more specifically historical-anthropological. Such factors would had to do with the formation of the historical and ci vilized societies, and more in particular with those structural situations where there are an unequal conjugation between the sociopolitical conflicts internal to each civilization and the conflicts with different civilizations. In those situations, and with regard to the social sectors more favored belonging to the most powerful civilizations in their conflicts with another civilizations, it w ould be opened a type of characteristic social relationships within those sectors subjected to the following dynamic: that consisting of "the indefinite substitution of the starting social conflicts for quasi-resolutions" of such conflicts, and around that dynamic the "Psychology" field would in fact become crystallized as an independent discipline. This dynamic turns out to have entirely the same form than the "dynamic", the "structure", and the "economy" considered by the Freudian metapsychology, although we understand this dynamic as socio-historically generated, and not as generated in a endogenuosly psychological way. But all this means that when they use the expression "Psychology" in order to refer to, at once or analogically, both the zoological and anthropological contexts, they are making a equivocal use of such expression, and this misunderstanding or double meaning will inexorably accompany the "Psychological institution".
