Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T17:47:11.182Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Against the unification of the behavioral sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2007

Steve Clarke
Steve Clarke
Affiliation:
Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Charles Sturt University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia Program on the Ethics of the New Biosciences, James Martin 21st Century School, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 1PT, United Kingdom. stephen.clarke@anu.edu.auhttp://www.cappe.edu.au/people/clarst/clarst.htm
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The contemporary behavioral sciences are disunified and could not easily become unified, as they operate with incompatible explanatory models. According to Gintis, tolerance of this situation is “scandalous” (sect. 12). I defend the ordinary behavioral scientist's lack of commitment to a unifying explanatory model and identify several reasons why the behavioral sciences should remain disunified for the foreseeable future.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , February 2007 , pp. 21 - 22
Copyright
2007 Cambridge University Press