Dear Tipsters, I know I am not answering the question posed, but I wonder why we might not prefer to critique a book from a real academic psychologist in a senior seminar. For example, Skinner's "About Behaviorism" or Hebb's "Essay on Mind" are titles that pop up for me.
My problem with critiquing a popular psychology book such as Gladwell's is that
you would have to go back to the original sources to see if he handled them
correctly. So, for me, why not just deal with primary sources from the start?
Of course, if the seminar is about popularizing psychology, I could see
critiquing a popular psychology book.
Sincerely,
Stuart
___________________________________________________________________________
"Floreat Labore"
[cid:[email protected]]
"Recti cultus pectora roborant"
Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D., Phone: 819 822 9600 x 2402
Department of Psychology, Fax: 819 822 9661
Bishop's University,
2600 rue College,
Sherbrooke,
Québec J1M 1Z7,
Canada.
E-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> (or
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>)
Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page:
http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy<blocked::http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy>
Floreat Labore"
[cid:[email protected]]
[cid:[email protected]]
___________________________________________________________________________
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=19606
or send a blank email to
leave-19606-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu<<inline: image001.jpg>>
<<inline: image002.jpg>>
<<inline: image003.jpg>>
