On Mar 18, 2007, at 9:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..........The issue is not whether their methods are
equally questionable but what their lasting influence has been for
scientific psychology. I assert that Piaget continues to be
influential;
Freud, not so much. .......
The last sentence depends on empirical evidence which, of course (as
I noted in my earlier message), is not available. So, we have to
agree to disagree regarding our guessed estimates.
The first sentence depends on what counts as "scientific"
psychology. One cannot decide what did or not contribute to
"scientific psychology" if what is to be included under this head is
not clear; failing that, the result will be a great deal of talk at
crossed-purposes. What is and is not "scientific psychology" is
an issue that, no doubt, needs extensively to be considered, but I do
not wish to stir what what may well turn out to be a hornet's nest.
However, if anyone does want to start such a discussion, I am willing
to participate if only in drips and drabs.
Peter
Peter Harzem, B.Sc.(Lond.), Ph.D.(Wales)
Hudson Professor Emeritus
Department of Psychology
Auburn University
Auburn, AL 36849-5214
USA
Phone: +334 844-6482
Fax: +334 844-4447
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personal E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
