Forms of explanation and why they may matter
Explanations from neuroscience are threatening to replace those from psychology in the eyes and hands of journalists, university administrators, granting agencies, and research students. If replacement happens, much of psychology will exist only as part of the historical record. It, thus, may be use...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2018
|
| Online Access: | View Fulltext in Publisher |
| LEADER | 01201nam a2200133Ia 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 10.1186-s41235-018-0143-2 | ||
| 008 | 220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d | ||
| 020 | |a 23657464 (ISSN) | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Forms of explanation and why they may matter |
| 260 | 0 | |b Springer |c 2018 | |
| 856 | |z View Fulltext in Publisher |u https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0143-2 | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a Explanations from neuroscience are threatening to replace those from psychology in the eyes and hands of journalists, university administrators, granting agencies, and research students. If replacement happens, much of psychology will exist only as part of the historical record. It, thus, may be useful to understand what forms of explanation are used by the two fields. Such an understanding may help us explain how each field can contribute to the other and why they are different. I review several templates of psychological and neuroscientific explanation, and criticize some others. I argue that psychology (and neuroscience) should continue to exist. Neuroscience is not better than psychology, and it cannot replace psychology. © 2018, The Author(s). | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Baron, J. |e author | |
| 773 | |t Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications | ||