The article discusses current issues of the history of psychology. The link between the solution of the issue of the emergence of scientific psychology with the accepted type of rationality (classical, nonclassical, post-nonclassical) and the criteria of scientific knowledge is considered. The changes in views on the scientific method in the history of psychology are traced. The methodological foundations of modern research on the history of psychology are the object of special attention. The question about the relation of the history of psychology to historical and psychological disciplines is raised. Different understandings of the relation between the disciplines of general psychology and the history of psychology, the relation of the subject of the history of psychology to the subject of psychology as a whole are presented in A.N. Zhdan’s and V.A. Koltsova’s approaches. The concepts of the history of science existing in Russian psychology — A.N. Zhdan’s history of psychology as the formation of its subject and M.G. Yaroshevsky’s categorical approach — and their accordance with views of modern psychological methodologists are analyzed. The polemic of monists and pluralists on the subject of psychology as well as various monistic solutions of this issue (E.E. Sokolova, V.D. Shadrikov, V.A. Mazilov) are discussed. The possibility of understanding the inner world of a person as the subject of psychology (V.D. Shadrikov, V.A. Mazilov) is problematized as inconsistent with modern tendencies in the development of the psyche, which are characterized by close intertwining with external technical means (digital technologies). The author suggests her own understanding of the subject of psychology, taking into account, on the one hand, the unity of psychological science, and on the other, the multiplicity of mental phenomena and research subjects. It is the concept of being of the psychic. The integrative nature of the conceptual apparatus of modern psychology in comparison to the basic categories by M.G. Yaroshevsky is stated. The problem of units of analysis of the history of psychology at different stages of its development as well as the transformation of the concept of a scientific school during the “closed fracture” (D.A. Leontiev) are considered. The possibilities and limitations of using artificial intelligence in research in the history of psychology are discussed. The importance of the development of comprehending thinking in the history of psychology as distinct from calculating thinking is emphasized.