Rodger W. Brown

greenspun.com : LUSENET : History & Theory of Psychology : One Thread

Ive recently been looking at the work of Rodger W. Browns studies on language acqusistion. As a work in a school, it was brought up in a discussion that could the work of Brown's studies be regarded as sufficient evidence to draw a conclusion about children in general. we all decided no but as were not psychological minded i though i would ask an expert just to prove us right. hope that you can help resolve our debate, many thanks Laura

-- Laura Green (Taloolah79@aol.com), October 21, 2003

Answers

I assume you mean Roger Brown, yes? The answer to your question depends entirely, of course, on what one believes counts as sufficient evidence to draw a scientific conclusion in general. If one requires absolutely conclusive proof, then we never have enough evidence to draw any conclusion about any aspect of the world at all. But no one does, anymore. All scientists are fallibilists now (if they stop to think about it). Certainty is not really the relevant criterion. The more important question is *not* whether Brown's (or anyone else's) evidence is "sufficient" in and of itself, but rather whether there is evidence contrary to Brown's (or anyone else's) position, if so how much, and whether it provides better evidence for some other theory (of similar or greater scope and explantory power).

-- Christopher Green (christo@yorku.ca), October 21, 2003.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ