Hi
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am not sure why this decision and the evidence that it is
based on is called "scientific". If it were "scientific" there
would be a controlled longitudinal study in progress comparing
group of children being raised with "mild" spanking (whatever
that means) and a group being raised without it and then some
meaningful discussion of findings on how "good" everyone turned
>out to be.
The ideal of a "true experiment" is far too stringent a criterion
to label something scientific. If it were required as a defining
feature for "scientific" then we would preclude vast amounts of
psychological and other research on topics (such as the long-term
effects of spanking) that do not easily lend themselves to such
rigorous control. Being scientific means that we amass whatever
empirical evidence and well-founded (i.e., empirically-based)
theoretical principles are relevant to the issue, fit these
together as best we can into a coherent framework, identify
possible flaws and weaknesses in the evidence/principles, and
derive in a rational and perhaps probabilistic manner the likely
implications of this work.
Best wishes
Jim
============================================================================
James M. Clark (204) 786-9757
Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax
University of Winnipeg 4L05D
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark
============================================================================
