Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:20:25.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Some Methodological Problems of Psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Gustav Bergmann
Gustav Bergmann*
Affiliation:
State University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

At the end of the last century, there began a movement away from traditional philosophy and towards a closer contact of philosophical thought with empirical science. Philosophers following this course were met halfway by groups of scientists, mostly physicists and mathematicians, who in their own field had found themselves face to face with problems which traditionally belonged to philosophy. But since neither of these two groups was inclined to respect conventional boundaries, they joined forces and the result of their endeavors proved challenging to both philosophy and science. Various aspects and representative theses of this movement are known to-day as logical positivism, operationism, physicalism or scientific empiricism. For the movement as a whole, however, the term logical positivism is now becoming generally used. The present paper should be considered as a selective and partly historical survey of the methodological discussion in psychology from the standpoint of logical positivism.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , April 1940 , pp. 205 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bergmann, G. On Physicalistic Models of Nonphysical Terms. This issue.Google Scholar
2. Feigl, H. Logical Analysis of the Psycho-physical Problem. Philos. of Science, 1934, 1, 420–445.10.1086/286341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Feigl, H. Unity of Science and Unitary Science. Journal of Unified Science, 1939.Google Scholar
4. Frank, Ph. Das Kausalgesetz und seine Grenzen. Wien, J. Springer, 1932.Google Scholar
5. Grelling, K. u. Oppenheim, P. Der Gestaltbegriff im Licht der neuen Logik. Erkenntnis, 1938, 7, 211–224.Google Scholar
6. Hempel, C. G. Analyse logique de la psychologie. Rev. Synthese, 1935, 10, 27–42.Google Scholar
7. Hilgard, E. R. The Relationship between the Conditioned Response and Conventional Learning Experiment. Psychol. Bull., 1937, 34, 61–102.10.1037/h0052972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hull, C. L. The Conflicting Psychologies of Learning—a Way Out. Psychol. Rev., 1935, 42, 491–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hull, C. L. Mind, Mechanism, and Adaptive Behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1937, 44, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Hull, C. L. The Problem of Stimulus Equivalence in Behavior Theory. Psychol. Rev., 1939, 46, 9–30.10.1037/h0054032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Lewin, K. Principles of Topological Psychology. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Lewin, K. Psychoanalysis and Topological Psychology. Bull. Menninger Clin. 1937, 1, 202–211.Google Scholar
13. Lewin, K. The Conceptual Representation and the Measurement of Psychological Forces. Contrib. Psychol. Theory, I, 4. Duke University Press, 1938.Google Scholar
14. Murray, H. A. Explorations in Personality. New York, Oxford University Press, 1938.Google Scholar
15. Rosenzweig, S. The Experimental Study of Psychoanalytic Concepts. Character and Personality, 1937, 6, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Stevens, S. S. Psychology and the Science of Science. Psychol. Bull., 1939, 36, 221–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Tolman, E. C. The Determiners of Behavior at a Choice Point. Psychol. Rev., 1938, 45, 1–41.10.1037/h0062733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Tolman, E. C. and Brunswik, E. The Organism and the Causal Texture of the Environment. Psychol. Rev., 1935, 42, 43–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar