| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Tough Sledding but Worth It,
By A Customer
This review is from: The Nature of Explanation (Paperback)
I was very surprised that my library was able to find this book for me. It is a thin, brown tome that was finally found in a university library, and it looks exactly like what it is, a very academic book written by a professor. It's one of those books that I have to reread several times to understand, for several reasons; the big academic words and thoughts Craik favors, being written in the 40s puts it in a somewhat foreign context to me, the presumption of much philosophical knowledge and history, and the general academic tone. However, the main point I was able to take away was his faith in experiment to verify his hypothesis of thought models, along with most everything else in psychology or philosophy, saying they should be no different than science. He devotes much of the book to denouncing flat statements or a priorism.A high point of the book for me was on page 92 of Chapter 6, Some Consequences of This Hypothesis, where the human finally overshadows the professor through this statement: "Confusion of two similar concepts is a fruitful cause of erroneous thinking. (I am particularly addicted to it, and if I ever conceive any original idea, it will be because I have been abnormally prone to confuse ideas, but have just saved myself by experimental verification, and have thus found remote analogies and relations which others have not considered! Others rarely make these confusions, and proceed by precise analysis.)" Craik did indeed have an original thought, the idea of mental models. One of the reasons I read this book was to see if I could find why this idea had lain dormant until Johnson-Laird revived it in 1983, and the general denseness of this book may be a big reason. But just because Craik was a less than captivating author doesn't detract from his very important place in the history of thought.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|