Abstract
I must say at the start, responding to the comments of Paul Secord and Peter Manicas, that I am very grateful to each of them for their careful remarks. I have the highest regard for their opinions — which, you may think, is self-serving under the circumstances. It is true that both somewhat favor my version of an argument that I share with them. Secord very kindly paraphrases its main features and suggests where one may locate work in theoretical psychology that is genuinely in closer accord with the main lines of my argument than I myself supply. Manicas presses me chiefly with regard to the strong disjunction I seem to support between the natural and the human sciences. A number of themes suggest themselves for elaboration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Davidson, D. (1967/1980). Causal relations. Essays on actions and events. Oxford: Clarendon.
Harré, R., & Madden, E. (1975). Causal powers. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Margolis, J. (1987). Science without unity: Reconciling the human and natural sciences. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Margolis, J. (1990). Explicating Actions: Reply to Commentaries. In: Robinson, D.N., Mos, L.P. (eds) Annals of Theoretical Psychology. Annals of Theoretical Psychology, vol 6. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-7901-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-0631-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive