The Place of Theory in a World of Facts

Reply to Commentators
  • H. J. Eysenck


Entering the lion’s den with trepidation, this particular Daniel appears to have escaped the wrath of philosophers with fewer wounds than might have been anticipated. I have never shared the belief, endemic among many scientists, that philosophy has nothing to teach us; the evils wrought by a wrong philosophy of science are too obvious for one to make such lighthearted comments, which indicate little but that the writer is self-taught and a good example of the horrors of unskilled labour. Nevertheless, my contribution was not intended to be the kind of composition that a professional philosopher might have put forward; I tried as best I could to join together philosophy of science, history of science, sociology of science, and psychology of science and to illustrate my conclusions by reference to some of my own studies. This was perhaps too ambitious an undertaking for a chapter and in due course may lead to the preparation of a book; however, the kindly welcome my efforts have received from three professional philosophers encourages me to believe that some, at least, of the major points I was trying to make may have been in the right direction.


Contingent Negative Variation Strong Theory Weak Theory Professional Philosopher Auxiliary Hypothesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Eysenck, H. J. (1953). Uses and abuses of psychology. Harmondsworth: Pelican.Google Scholar
  2. Eysenck, H. J. (1973). The measurement of intelligence. Lancaster: Medical and Technical.Google Scholar
  3. Eysenck, H. J., & Rachman, S. (1965). Causes and cures of neurosis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  4. Firkowska-Mankiewicz, A., & Czarkowski, M. P. (1982). Social status and mental test performance in Warsaw children. Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Howard, R. C., Fenton, G. W., & Fenerick, P. B. C. (1982). Event-related brain potentials in personality and psychopathology: A Pavlovian approach. New York: Research Studies Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jensen, A. R. (1982). Reaction time and psychometric g. In H. J. Eysenck (Ed.), A model for intelligence. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Jensen, A. R., Schafer, E. W. P., & Crinella, F. M. (1981). Reaction time, evoked brain potentials and psychometric g in the severely retarded. Intelligence, 5, 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. McCord, R., & Wakefield, J. (1981). Arithmetic achievement as a function of introversion- extraversion and teacher-presented reward and punishment. Personality and Individual Differences, 2, 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Rachman, S., & Hodgson, R. (1981). Obsessions and compulsions. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  10. Schafer, E. W. P. (1979). Cognitive neural adaptability: A biological basis for individual differences in intelligence. Psychophysiology, 16, 199.Google Scholar
  11. Schafer, E. W. P., & Marcus, M. M. (1973). Self-stimulation alters human sensory brain responses. Science, 181, 175–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schafer, E. W. P., & Marcus, M. M. (1973). Self-stimulation alters human sensory brain responses. Science, 181, 175–177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Walter, G., Cooper, R., Aldridge, V.J., McCallum, W. C., & Winder, A. L. (1964). Contingent negative variation: An electric sign of sensorimotor association and expectancy in man. Nature, 203, 380–384.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Yule, W., Gold, R. D., & Busch, C. (1982). Long-term predictive validity of the WPPSI: An 11-year follow-up study. Personality and Individual Differences, 3, 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. J. Eysenck
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PsychiatryUniversity of LondonLondonEngland

Personalised recommendations