標題: Titlebook: Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science; William O‘Donohue Book 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013 APA‘s Et [打印本頁] 作者: 凝固 時間: 2025-3-21 19:29
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science影響因子(影響力)
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science影響因子(影響力)學科排名
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science網(wǎng)絡公開度
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science網(wǎng)絡公開度學科排名
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science被引頻次
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science被引頻次學科排名
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science年度引用
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science年度引用學科排名
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science讀者反饋
書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science讀者反饋學科排名
作者: Ingredient 時間: 2025-3-21 22:37 作者: 拉開這車床 時間: 2025-3-22 03:43 作者: acetylcholine 時間: 2025-3-22 06:40
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-89593-6ugh a critical examination of psychology or aspects of psychology is laudatory, psychologists also need to accurately understand and to assume a critical stance toward the meta-scientific views that they employ. In this chapter, the views of the historian of science, Thomas Kuhn, are described and e作者: Inveterate 時間: 2025-3-22 09:56
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00091-2st few decades. Many of these views are quite controversial on a number of dimensions—sometimes the criticism is that these views are meaningless or at a minimum obscurantist (see the so-called Sokal affair that will be discussed below); sometimes the claim is that they are unfairly and unduly incen作者: Crepitus 時間: 2025-3-22 13:07
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-15097-6t, scholars studying science brought the tools of traditional philosophy, namely an examination of arguments (including inductive and deductive arguments) and therefore an examination of the logic and the semantics of arguments.作者: Crepitus 時間: 2025-3-22 17:38
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-15097-6t, scholars studying science brought the tools of traditional philosophy, namely an examination of arguments (including inductive and deductive arguments) and therefore an examination of the logic and the semantics of arguments.作者: refine 時間: 2025-3-23 00:05
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-05179-0The motivation for this volume is simple. For a variety of reasons, clinical psychologists have long shown considerable interest in the philosophy of science. When logical positivism gained currency in the 1930s, psychologists were among the most avid readers of what these philosophers had to say about science.作者: 欺騙手段 時間: 2025-3-23 04:27
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00091-2In this chapter, we will provide a brief overview of four other major philosophers of science: Paul Feyerabend, Imre Lakatos, Larry Laudan, and Alan Gross. Each of these philosophers’ work has been impactful and the reader must have some acquaintance with this literature if they are to be conversant in the contemporary meta-scientific literature.作者: 我要威脅 時間: 2025-3-23 06:30 作者: 殺子女者 時間: 2025-3-23 11:30 作者: 埋葬 時間: 2025-3-23 15:38 作者: thwart 時間: 2025-3-23 20:39 作者: 弄污 時間: 2025-3-23 23:25
978-3-319-03319-8Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013作者: 出血 時間: 2025-3-24 02:54 作者: 6Applepolish 時間: 2025-3-24 10:28 作者: 偽證 時間: 2025-3-24 14:02
The Major Problems of the Philosophy of Science and Clinical Psychology,or example, if one thinks that it is just absolutely clear what is morally right and what is morally wrong, and why these have this sort of status—then, it would seem to follow that there is then no need to examine questions regarding morality. In this view, there simply is no problem to be explored作者: 誰在削木頭 時間: 2025-3-24 15:34 作者: 無能性 時間: 2025-3-24 21:42 作者: GONG 時間: 2025-3-25 00:11 作者: 圓桶 時間: 2025-3-25 04:19
Post-Modernism, Social Constructionism, and the Science Wars,st few decades. Many of these views are quite controversial on a number of dimensions—sometimes the criticism is that these views are meaningless or at a minimum obscurantist (see the so-called Sokal affair that will be discussed below); sometimes the claim is that they are unfairly and unduly incen作者: 上坡 時間: 2025-3-25 11:05 作者: 旅行路線 時間: 2025-3-25 15:40
Book 2013 science.? When logical positivism gained currency in the 1930s, psychologists were among the most avid readers of what these philosophers had to say about science. Part of the critique of Skinner’s radical behaviorism and thus behavior therapy was that it relied on, and thus was logically dependent作者: Indict 時間: 2025-3-25 16:03
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-89593-6xamined. The following major questions are addressed: What were Kuhn’s investigative methods? What are his views of science? What exactly do Kuhn’s conclusions about science mean? How does Kuhn rely on psychology? and, What does Kuhn have to say about psychology.作者: 吝嗇性 時間: 2025-3-25 23:18
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00091-2diary—for example, a prominent feminist critic of science Harding (.) has called Newton’s classic . “a rape manual” because “science is the male rape of female nature”; and of course sometimes the criticism is simply that they are wrong.作者: PON 時間: 2025-3-26 03:01 作者: synchronous 時間: 2025-3-26 07:21 作者: DIS 時間: 2025-3-26 11:54 作者: 辭職 時間: 2025-3-26 14:55
Epistemology and Logical Positivism,lems of epistemology. In most contemporary views, epistemology and the philosophy of science are highly interrelated because science attempts to produce knowledge—and for many, it has been a unique ability to produce knowledge.作者: apiary 時間: 2025-3-26 17:07 作者: Decimate 時間: 2025-3-26 22:39
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-73137-2 between good science and bad science, what is special about science, what is the logic of science, what a cause is, whether observation is theory neutral or not, etc., one need not rise to the meta-perspective and worry about and attempt to resolve these problems.作者: freight 時間: 2025-3-27 02:19 作者: 沖擊力 時間: 2025-3-27 05:39 作者: CAGE 時間: 2025-3-27 11:32 作者: Conducive 時間: 2025-3-27 13:56
Post-Modernism, Social Constructionism, and the Science Wars,diary—for example, a prominent feminist critic of science Harding (.) has called Newton’s classic . “a rape manual” because “science is the male rape of female nature”; and of course sometimes the criticism is simply that they are wrong.作者: 梯田 時間: 2025-3-27 20:59
Book 2013 on, the truth of logical positivism—a claim decisively refuted both historically and logically by L.D. Smith (1986) in his important Behaviorism and Logical Positivism: A Reassessment of the Alliance.? ?作者: palliate 時間: 2025-3-28 00:08
8樓作者: 輕而薄 時間: 2025-3-28 03:10
8樓作者: 交響樂 時間: 2025-3-28 08:22
9樓作者: 無可爭辯 時間: 2025-3-28 10:50
9樓作者: Hot-Flash 時間: 2025-3-28 18:40
9樓作者: 提名 時間: 2025-3-28 21:46
9樓作者: OMIT 時間: 2025-3-28 23:14
10樓作者: 可耕種 時間: 2025-3-29 03:31
10樓作者: 假裝是我 時間: 2025-3-29 09:03
10樓作者: evince 時間: 2025-3-29 15:18
10樓
