We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
7

Although the original humorism put forth by Hippocrates and Galen based on Egyptian and Mesopotamian influences was rejected by science as a general theory explaining all diseases and disabilities, a later version restricted to temperaments in psychology, that removed their link to supposed "bodily fluids", survives until today. The psychological shift can ...


4

Popper's main idea about the demarcation problem : pseudo-science is untestable, is a marvel of simplicity : On this criterion of demarcation physics, chemistry, and (non-introspective) psychology, amongst others, are sciences, psychoanalysis is a pre-science (i.e., it undoubtedly contains useful and informative truths, but until such time as ...


4

Scientific psychology only came into being in 19th century, at the end of 18th Kant, now considered one of its forefathers, even opined that psychology can never be a science. Before that it was mostly the domain of philosophers and theologians (much like physics before 17th), Brett's monumental History of Psychology, published in 1912-1921, devotes 90% of ...


2

–– Note: this currently answers the first revision of the question. The current edit invalidates this answer. It seems to be a bit more indirect than how I read your question. But here are the relevant parts from one such reference: Propagandists echoed and magnified the hatred and suspicion sown by Habyarimana and officials around him. Under the cover ...


2

Turings works are highly formal and hardcore mathematical. Actually, not even a simple mathematician would understand it, if he is not on a similar area. The Turing-test is a very different thing from the Turing-machines. The Turing-machines aren't about consciousness, they are about computability. Turing reached very… surprising results, from a ...


1

As far as I remember, there was some explanation in 'The History of the theories of aether and electricity", Vol. 1.


1

No, at least not in the academic sector. It it now commonly held knowledge that it is not one or the other, but the interaction between nature and nurture that shapes an individual. The "debate" therefore is currently how much of each contributes to any given developmental mechanism. However, I cannot guarantee that some independent special interest group ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible