Titlebook: Discourse and Behavior; Jack Bilmes Book 1986 Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986 Common Sense.Nation.discourse and behavior.lit

FARCE

書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior影響因子(影響力)




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior被引頻次




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior年度引用




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior年度引用學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior讀者反饋




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Discourse and Behavior讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

indignant

形狀

GUISE

Heat Viewed at Different Scalesn commonsense explanation depicts man as rational, and (2) that such a theory is that which social-science explanation of action ought also to suppose” (p. 43). The second assumption is fully discussed in the following chapters. As we have already seen, and as Pettit himself at least partly apprecia

ALIEN

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1158-7 rational manner? In carrying out the decision study, I collected data in the form of villagers’ explanations of their own and others’ choices. I attended to the data as indications of a pattern of intentions and motives. This is not merely a social-scientific strategy, but the normal orientation of

BLAZE

The standard SIR epidemic modelitions and daily practices, they are so close to truisms, that the tendency among sociologists of action has been to accept them uncritically. On the evidence of the preceding chapter, though, common sense and intuition are far from reliable indicators of internal states and processes. Our self-insi

BLAZE

因無(wú)茶而冷淡

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30900-8on—the concept of norm—and the discursive alternative to the Parsonian theory of normative action. At the same time, we continue our investigation of commonsense explanation. Finally, in this and the next chapters, we add a few strokes to our image of an adequate sociology of action. We have seen th

Expediency

Stochastic Epidemic Models with Inferencescriptions and accounts of social order are phrased in terms of rules. (Of course, such descriptions may also be phrased in terms of statistical tendencies, but this is not the approach of a discursive sociology of action.) Therefore, we must reach some understanding about the fundamental nature of

飛行員

Chapter 1 Stochastic Epidemic Modelsnations of behavior. I have raised what I take to be serious questions about the empirical foundations and the internal logic of the orthodox/commonsense theory. As a foundation for an alternative approach to social action, I proposed that we view internal states, such as intention, motivation, and