Bebaviouralism

commitment simply means that, when a particular theoretical statement
is being investigated, researchers must not limit themselves to a
consideration of only those observed cases that provide 'anecdotal'
support for the theoretical claims that are being made. Rather, the
researcher must consider all the cases - or at least a representative
sample of them - that are encompassed by the theoretical statement that
is being evaluated.

承諾只是意謂那, 當一個特別的理論上的說明正在被偵查的時候, 研究人員不
能對一個訂約要因限制他們自己不過那些遵守了提供對理論上的支持聲稱那正在被
發表的 '軼聞的' 的個案。 然而﹐研究人員一定要考慮所有的個案 - 或
至少一個他們的代表樣品 - 哪一被理論上的正在被評估的說明包含。

It is in this context that the use and development of statistical
techniques are justified by behaviouralists - as a vehicle for
analysing large anmnuts of 'relevant empirical evidence'. It shotfid be
emphasised in the strongest possible terms, however, that
behavlouralism is not synonymous eithcr with quantification or with the
downgrading of qualitative research.

它是在統計的技術的使用和開展被 behaviouralists 証
明的這一個上下文中 -如分析 '有關的經驗的證明' 的大
的 anmnuts 的一個車輛. 它 shotfid 是在最牢固的可能的
條件中強調,然而, 那 behavlouralism 不是和定量或質的研
究低級產品的同義字的 eithcr 。

Certainly, behavioural researchers have frequently used quantitative
techniques as heuristic devices for handling evidence. There is nothing
intrinsic in behaviouralism's epistemological position, however, that
requires quantification, On the contrary, quantitative and qualitative
forms of empirical analysis are equally acceptable to behavioural
researchers. What matters for them is not whether evidence is
qualitative or quantitative but

確定地﹐行為的研究人員時常已經為處理證明以定量法作為自發的裝置。 沒有東
西內在的在行為主義的認識論職務中﹐然而﹐那需要定量，正相反
， quantitative 和質化經驗的分析的表格對行為的研究人員相等
地是可接受的。什麼事實因為他們是不是否證明是質化
或 quantitative 但

(a) that it is used to evaluate theoretical propositions, and (b) that
it is employed systematically rather than illustratively.

(一) 哪一它用來評估理論上的計劃, 而且它有系統地被雇用不願說明地。

The second characteristic feature of behavioural analysis is slightly
more subtle in its implications - but no less important. It is simply
that scientific theories and/or explanations must, in principle, be
capable of being falsified. Note here that the reference is to '
scientific' rather than simply to 'empirical' or 'explanatory' theories.
This usage reflects behaviouralism's commitment to Karl Popper's
revision of traditional positivism III which be (a) substituted the
principle of falsifiability for that of verification, and (b)
simnltaneously identified the falsifiabillty criterion as the line of
demarcation between 'scientific' and 'pseudo-scientific' enquiry (
Popper

第二個行為的分析的特性的特色證券些微地是更敏感的在它的涵意中 - 但
是沒有比較不重要。 它只是是必須所，大體而言，能夠被偽造的那個科學的理論
及[或] 解釋。 在這裡注意 , 參考資料是到 '科學的' 不願只是
到 '經驗的' 或 '解釋的' 理論。這一個習慣歸咎於損害對卡爾弄出砰然
的被驗證為那代替 falsifiability 的原理的傳統的實證主
義 3 的修訂的行為主義的承諾﹐而且 simnltaneously 確
認 falsifiabillty 標準為在 '科學的' 和 '假的 -
科學的' 詢問之間的劃分的行 (弄出砰然

1959).

1959)。

In order fully to appreciate the import of this statement, a brief
digression is necessary. We need to consider precisely what is meant by
a theory or an explanation being 'falsiflable'. Consider the familiar
statement that Popper himself used as an example: 'All swans arc white'.


井然有序地完全抬高價格這一個說明的進口,一個簡短的離題部分是必須的
。 我們需要精確地考慮什麼被一個理論或一個作
為 'falsiflable'的解釋意謂。考慮熟悉的說明那一個弄出砰然他
自己被使用為例: '所有的天鵝弧白的'.

Suppose that we observe a black swan. What does this tell us about the
statement? One interpretation is that observing tile black swan shows
the statement to be empirically false: the statement was in principle
capable of being falsified and it has been falsified. But there is
another way of interpreting the statement in the light of a black swan
being observed.

假如我們遵守黑市的天鵝。 這告訴我們關於說明什麼? 一個翻譯是那遵守瓦片
黑市的天鵝顯示說明到以經驗為主地是假的: 說明大體而言能夠被偽造，而且它
已經被偽造。 但是根據被遵守 的黑市的天鵝解釋說明有另一個方法。

The statement says that all swans are white. It follows that tile black
swan that we have observed cannot be a swan because it is not white:
the statement, therefore, is not false.

說明說所有的天鵝是白的。 它經營我們已經遵守的那瓦片黑市天鵝不可能是天鵝
因為它不是白: 說明,因此,不是假的。

Can both of these interpretations be correct? The answer is that
they can. Each interpretation makes a different set of assumptions
about the

能這兩個翻譯是正確的? 回答是他們能。 每個翻譯獲得一不同組的假定
關於那