Paradigms and `the Myth of Framework'

Abstract

Very little that passes today for conventional practices in psychology would measure up well against the current and traditional standards that guide thinking in the developed sciences. The best explanation for this is not the alleged complexity of the subject matter, but an utterly tamed and merely habitual mode of explanation tied to profound misunderstandings about the nature and conditions of scientific progress. Culprits are not difficult to identify, but the editorial practices of the major journals must rank high on the list of perpetrators.