The current dismay within the mainstream of nomological psychology may result from the fact that the anomaly of non-replicability has a direct bearing on its very own methodological requirements and quality criteria of empirical research. The call for more scientific rigour on the customary avenue in order to secure unambiguous empirical findings gives, however, rise to suspect that the deeper reason for this anomaly is not yet recognised: namely, the misguided regulation of a strictly objective inquiry, distorting what is present and relevant in everyday life and treating the ‘subjective’ of the subject matter as the central root of interfering factors which have to be eliminated or neutralised in the pursuit of experimental hypothesis testing. The problems of replicability would thus be a proof once again that the notorious inversion between matter and method does not really work, due to the uncircumventable characteristics of human inter-/subjectivity. In this sense, the replication crisis replicates the perennial topic of all historical discussions about a crisis in psychology – the failure of a ‘psychology without subject’.

当前主流心理学中的沮丧可能源于这样一个事实，即不可复制性的异常与其自身的方法论要求和实证研究的质量标准有直接关系。然而，为了确保明确的实证研究结果，人们呼吁在习惯途径上采取更严格的科学方法，但人们怀疑这种异常现象的更深层次的原因尚未得到承认：即严格客观调查的误导性规定，歪曲了在日常生活中存在和相关，并将主题的“主观”视为干扰因素的中心根源，在追求实验假设检验时必须消除或中和这些因素。因此，可复制性问题将再次证明，由于人类相互间/主体性的不可规避特征，臭名昭著的物质和方法之间的倒置实际上并不奏效。从这个意义上说，复制危机复制了所有关于心理学危机的历史讨论的永恒话题——“没有主体的心理学”的失败。