1. In your appraisals of the APA there's heard a disrespectful attitude to it. How do American colleagues find such appraisal?

Firstly, my attitude to the APA is respectful and deferential as to the most considerable organization smooth-running and, despite of poor financing, displaying its efficacy. It is well disciplined and its bureaucracy is well organized. Among other national associations the APA is the most efficient and productive. But one has to stress an appraisal in order to set off, to emphasize, the significance of psychological problems that confront psychology and the means which are granted today to this science by our society. In such situation the financial lack is evident. There is a disparity between the efforts that are necessary and the means that are expended. Secondly, it may seem strange, but the attitude of American colleagues is not hostile. Among those who visit the site Society of General and Theoretical Psychology Americans make up the overwhelming majority. The interest is expressed. About 450 psychologists look through SGTP site a day. They often note the incorrect use of the word "mankind" and the errors of translation. There are many positive appraisals.

2. Are you an APA member?

No, I am not.

3. Would you like to be an APA member?

After being acquainted with the APA regulations and especially with its ethical codex - my answer is 'completely no'. The APA ethical codex is able to dash creative sources. Who (including myself) is entitled to interfere into somebody's else business with any definite regulations - is it the APA? If one behaves sincerely and consecutively he/she should not join the APA.

4. Besides the APA criticism what else are you suggesting?

To attract attention of those on whom the adequate financing of psychology depends in the light of the problems that could be solved by psychological science. Psychology doesn't create a material welfare, it is not like economics. But a person's life is not only in using material welfare. Psychologically a person's life is not reduced to material welfare. It is possible to conquer the whole world but harm the soul. On the other hand it is possible to ignore material welfare by one's strong will. Somebody teaches how to do it and at the same moment betrays human confidence. Psychology should help a person to understand him-/herself in this case as well. And this is not the only noble task which psychology may solve. And the science with such noble aims should have an adequate financing.

5. What will your SGTP present at the 27th Congress of Psychology?

As for me I've prepared 23 reports to be made at the congress and the summaries were sent in advance. Thirteen of them were in accordance in the Topic Category List and are admitted, and ten were not appropriate to the Topic Category List by congress organizers.

SGTP considers the Topic Category List of the 27th Congress incomplete and one-sided: 1) the temporary aspect of psychic phenomena is out of scientific consideration; 2) there are not shown any possibilities in describing psychic phenomena form theoretical position, there is no any possibility of creating strictly theoretical psychology.

In this connection SGTP as far back as 1999 submitted its Addition and suggested that there should be attracted attention to these subjects and that the future participants of the 27th Congress should be involved into discussion on these subjects. Perhaps, our suggestion was a little bit late and that's why hasn't found any response. There is the certainty that our Addition will be presented in the Topic Category List of the next, the 28th Congress; its organizers won't escape from it.