Comment: Five Uses of Philosophy in Scientific Theories of Emotion

Emotion Review 6 (4):324-326 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Commentary on four articles in a special issue on “theories of emotion,” comparing the theories with respect to five conceptual contrasts. The first four contrasts are essentialism versus nonessentialism, discriminative versus integrative theories, individual versus social focus, and instrumentalism versus scientific realism. Although scientific psychologists appear to have reached consensus in favor of nonessentialism and they freely use both realist and instrumentalist interpretations, there is no consensus on the other two contrasts. The final contrast explored addresses attitudes toward the use of philosophy in scientific theorizing, and whether philosophy is best kept in the background or brought into the foreground.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Comment: Journeys to the Center of Emotion.Brian Parkinson - 2013 - Emotion Review 5 (2):180-184.
What Scientific Theories Could Not Be.Hans Halvorson - 2012 - Philosophy of Science 79 (2):183-206.
The classification of emotion and scientific realism.Peter Zachar - 2006 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 26 (1-2):120-138.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-03

Downloads
22 (#708,419)

6 months
4 (#787,709)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Zachar
Auburn University Montgomery