In reply to Lamiell's (1991) criticism, we argue that his notion of nomothesis reflects a Newtonian, mechanistic notion of lawfulness and that his otherwise justified attack on the individual differences paradigm is an overreaction to an era that is dominated by this paradigm.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HermansH. J. M. (1988). ‘On the integration of nomothetic and idiographic research methods in the study of personal meaning’, Journal of Personality, 56:785–812.
2.
HermansH. J. M. (1991). ‘The person as co‐investigator in self‐research: valuation theory’, European Journal of Personality, 5:217–234.
3.
HermansH. J. M.BonariusH. (1991). ‘The person as co‐investigator in personality research’, European Journal of Personality, 5:199–216.
4.
LamiellJ. T. (1991). ‘Valuation theory, the self‐confrontation method, and scientific personality psychology’, European Journal of Personality, 5:235–244.
5.
PrigogineI.StengersI. (1984). Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature, Bantam, New York.
