Hibbert, Ruth (2016) What Is an Immature Science? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 30 (1). pp. 1-17. ISSN 0269-8595. (doi:10.1080/02698595.2016.1240433) (KAR id:60602)
PDF
Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English |
|
Download this file (PDF/418kB) |
Preview |
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader | |
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2016.1240433 |
Abstract
Cognitive and social sciences such as psychology and sociology are often described as immature sciences. But what is immaturity? According to the received view, immaturity is disunity, where disunity can usefully be cashed out in terms of having a plurality of disunified frameworks in play, where these frameworks consist of concepts, theories, goals, practices, methods, criteria for what counts as a good explanation, etc. However, there are some reasons to think that the cognitive and social sciences should be disunified in this sense. If that is right, either these sciences should remain immature, or we need a new account of immaturity. The former option is unappealing. I therefore provide an alternative account of immaturity, based on Dudley Shapere’s work on the internal/external distinction. I then go on to use this account to argue against the imposition of unification on the cognitive and social sciences. Acceptance of disunity may be the route to maturity, rather than a sign of immaturity.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
DOI/Identification number: | 10.1080/02698595.2016.1240433 |
Divisions: | Divisions > Division of Arts and Humanities > School of Culture and Languages |
Depositing User: | Ruth Hibbert |
Date Deposited: | 28 Feb 2017 15:42 UTC |
Last Modified: | 05 Nov 2024 10:53 UTC |
Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/60602 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Link to SensusAccess
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):