Titlebook: Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science; William O‘Donohue Book 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013 APA‘s Et

凝固

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(xué)科排名




書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)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(xué)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(xué)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(xué)科排名

Ingredient

拉開這車床

acetylcholine

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

Inveterate

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

Crepitus

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.

Crepitus

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.

refine

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.

欺騙手段

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.

我要威脅