This article introduces Nature-Conforming Psychology, proposing a unified framework for human psychic organization, suggesting implications for psychological science.
Despite significant advances in the study of individual psychological processes, the principles governing the organization of the human psyche as an integrated system remain insufficiently developed. Contemporary psychological theories provide detailed accounts of cognitive, emotional, motivational, behavioral, and social aspects of mental life; however, they do not offer a unified theoretical framework explaining how these components are organized into a coherent psychic system. This article introduces Nature-Conforming Psychology as a new theoretical and methodological framework that conceptualizes the human psyche as an integrated psychic organization comprising four interrelated analytical dimensions: structural, functional, dynamic, and resource. The purpose of this study is to provide the theoretical and methodological foundation for Nature-Conforming Psychology as an independent branch of fundamental psychological science by defining its object of inquiry, subject matter, conceptual framework, and methodological principles. The central hypothesis of the proposed concept is that the stability, development, and adaptive capacity of human psychic organization are determined not only by the level of development of individual psychological functions but also by the degree of their internal coherence. Within this framework, nature-conformity is interpreted as a fundamental principle governing the organization and development of the human psychic system. The article formulates the fundamental propositions of the concept, presents a general systemic model of psychic organization, and outlines directions for its further theoretical development and empirical investigation. As the first publication in a planned series of studies, this article provides the initial systematic presentation of the theoretical foundations of Nature-Conforming Psychology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Svetlana Nesterova (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: