home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.cognitive:1040 comp.ai.philosophy:7401
- Path: sparky!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!mizar.cc.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!skyfox!meagher
- From: meagher@skyfox
- Newsgroups: sci.cognitive,comp.ai.philosophy
- Subject: RE: AI vs Cognitive Science vs Cognitive Psychology (long)
- Date: 26 JAN 93 02:42:40 GMT
- Organization: University of Saskatchewan
- Lines: 32
- Message-ID: <26JAN93.02424000@skyfox>
- References: <C1BDyn.4vB@cs.bham.ac.uk> <24JAN93.19042016@skyfox> <1993Jan25.085716.7194@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: sask.usask.ca
-
- In a previous article, eriksson@gvaadg.enet.dec.com wrote:
- >
- >In article <24JAN93.19042016@skyfox>, meagher@skyfox writes:
- >|> I don't want to argue for the long-term distinguishability of
- >|>cog. sci., cog. psyche, and cog. neuro, however I do think that presently
- >|>there are some distinguishing features of these areas that arise for
- >|>reasons having to do with "stabalizing" factors inherent in science.
- >|>refers to self-authenticating techniques that "harmonize" data, theory, and
- >|>methods (for more, see recent writings by Hacking).
- >
- >Could you give references to the articles/books (Hacking's) you're referring
- >to?
-
- Here is a ref:
-
- Hacking, I. (1992). 'Style' for historians and philosophers. Stud. Hist.
- Phil. Sci., 23(1), 1-20.
-
- For more by Hacking see references therein.
-
- Also, along the same (constructivist) lines I would recommend:
-
- Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of
- Psychological Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
- Hope they are helpful.
-
- Paul D. Meagher
- Dept. of Psychology
- University of Saskatchewan
- meagher@sask.usask.ca
-
-