Abstract
Eysenck’s paper is about metatheoretical and substantive theoretical issues. Since I am almost wholly in agreement on the metatheoretical issues, I shall pass them over in silence (especially since I also believe that the best justification for this or that approach to science is simply to get on with it and show what it can achieve). And since a cardinal feature of Eysenck’s approach to science is that substantive theories must stand or fall by their success in accounting for empirical data, I shall concentrate in this commentary on a few key points at which one of Eysenck’s own theories is in danger of foundering (for a fuller treatment, see Gray, 1981).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
