The paper explores Durkheim?s ambivalent position towards psychology, drawing
on his debates with Comte, Tarde, and Wundt. In addressing this issue, we
propose different types of anti-psychologism in sociology: epistemological
(excluding psychological dimensions from sociological explanations),
institutional (denying psychology the status of science), and strategic
(establishing sociology as a scientific field). The analysis shows that
Durkheim?s strategic anti-psychologism was more prominent and comprehensive
than his epistemological anti-psychologism. Durkheim was against
psychologism in sociology, but he incorporated psychological dimensions into
his theory (cognitivism). He opted for a clear distinction between
sociological and psychological fields, but he accepted psychology as an
academic discipline (unlike Comte) and even incorporated some ideas from
Wundt?s psychology. Durkheim?s position was determined by historical
developments in the emerging social sciences. The competition between the
neighbouring academic fields asked for ?distinction?. At the same time,
shifting paradigms in psychology resulted in converging positions (Durkheim
and Wundt). We argue that a common perception of Durkheim?s
anti-psychologism has overshadowed his nuanced approach to psychological
factors in his work. It has also determined the long-term ?fear of
psychologism? and a lack of relevant psychological perspective in sociology.