Re: History of Psychology:
Popper, Karl Discussion Deck
If ye would like to moderate the Popper, Karl Discussion Deck, please drop becket@jollyroger.com a
line.
Popper, Karl & Re: History of Psychology
[Open Source CMS
Renaissance][Postnuke Hosting][Gallery
Hosting][Blog Hosting]
DR. ELLIOT'S NORTH AMERICAN GREAT BOOKS TOUR--COMING TO A BOOK
STORE NEAR YOU
[GREAT
BOOKS: DISCUSS THE
TRAGEDY OF DRAKERAFT.COM][Great Books Lovers Match]
[Physics Forums][Poetry][Shakespeare's Plays][Great Books][Open Source Business]
[Great Books Games][Federalist Papers][Poetry Contest][Classic eCards][Great Books
Forums]
The new Popper, Karl Forum is at
killdevilhill.com/philosophyforums.
The
World's Largest Literary Cafe: Carolinanavy.com
[Carolinanavy.com][Nantuckets.com][BusinessPhilosophy.com][Classicals.com][Quarterdeck]
[
Jolly Roger Live
Chat][The Jolly
Roger][KillDevilHill.com][Western Canon University]
[Federalistnavy.com Spirit of
America][Starbuck.com Classical Poetry Port]
[ussconstitutions.com]
[Free jollyrogermail]
[Shakespearean
Greetings]
[nantucketnavy.com][hatteraslight.com][Clicgreetings.com]
[SEARCH]
[Follow Ups][Post Followup][Popper, Karl Forum Frigate]
[]
[The
World's Largest Literary Cafe: Carolinanavy.com]
Posted by hamed on July 01, 19102 at 17:49:36:
In Reply to: History of Psychology posted by Nela on December 06, 19100 at 12:07:44:
: What do you think would Popper say about Voluntarism, Structuralism, Functionalism, Behaviorism, and Psychoysis? Whould he say that all these psychological approaches were scientific or only some,or none of them were scientific? The way I understand Popper's opinion of what is scientific and what is not is that a scientific theory must be refutable. If any observation agrees with a theory, the theory is weak not strong. For Popper a theory to be scientific, it must make risky predicitions, predicitions that run a real risk of being incorrect. Theories that do not make risky predictions or that explain phenomena after they have already occurred are not scientific. From this definition I understand that any theory that is created after an observation is not scientific, and if it is not replaced by other theories it is not scientific. So is Voluntarism, behaviorism, psychoysis unscientific, because they were made after an observation, and functionalism, and structurlism scientific, because the ideas were made before observation? Please explain? Thanks I will be waiting for your answer.
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup