Abstract
I defend my earlier position that operational definition is a ritual procedure that obscures and misleads psychologists about the nature of science. I use examples from Grace's (2001) paper and briefly sketch new problems for operationism as an approach to mentalistic vocabulary. I conclude that operationism is not the theoretically neutral technique it is purported to be, but instead endorses behaviorism and anti-realism in philosophy of science.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
