Biological theories and quantitative methods in psychology are frequently criticized for fostering reductionist accounts of complex human phenomena. While calls for rigorous quantification—often seen as a solution to the replication crisis—reflect a poorly understood positivism, critiques of this approach sometimes overlook the potential of natural science methods when used with epistemological awareness. This oversight weakens a critical psychology perspective by ignoring that humans are natural beings embedded in physical systems, whose biological foundations and everyday activities yield both qualitative and quantitative traces.

This paper argues for integrating natural science approaches into critical psychology, guided by an understanding of their explanatory limits and in accordance with Haraway’s concept of ‘situated knowledge.’ Two case studies illustrate this: First, research into neuronal mechanisms and epigenetics shows how biological methods can reveal the developmental and sociocultural dynamics of psychological phenomena. Second, the use of sensor and log data (e.g., tracking sleep, activity, and digital interactions) provides quantitative insights into everyday behavioral patterns of users. While such data have been linked to both creating self-awareness (e.g., of mood swings and related stressors) and problematic self-optimization, I explore how the computational frameworks behind these analyses—rooted in systems theory and probabilistic causality—challenge simplistic causal models and support a dynamic, embodied view of human interactions with digital tracking.

Together, these cases demonstrate that a nuanced engagement with natural science and quantitative methodologies can enrich critical psychology, fostering a more complex understanding of human experiences.