What do you think?
Rate this book
Theoretical Issues in Psychology: An Introduction
`As will be evident, this is a wide conspectus in textbook mode (cited authors are frequently characterized and ascribed dates). The treatment is generally clear and up-to-date. It is eclectic with a welcome inclusion of European as well as American authors.... Positive features are the introductions to and summaries of sections; and the glossary (which will certainly be found useful by students). The English is virtually impeccable.... The book is similar in scope to Bechtel′s Philosophy of Mind and Philosophy of Science , and my own Conceptual Issues in Psychology , being more comprehensive and less partisan than Bechtel, and more philosophical and less psychological than Valentine. I am in a particularly good position
208 pages, Paperback
First published June 23, 1997
15 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 2, 2018
- This book is the bane of my graduate student existence. I was required to read and learn the first 10 chapters of this book; lets just say I would rather walk barefoot through a mile of Legos, than to ever give my attention/time to this text. There are many reasons why this book is horrible, which I will outline below. My condolences to anyone that was assigned reading to this textbook.
- overly emphasized parts when not necessary
Have you ever written an essay that you put so much background and introductory filler in, since you had to meet the page requirement? Multiply that by 10 and you will get an idea on what this book is about. Chapters never seem to get to the point - they are laden with page-long explanations on the history, background, and context of X. The filler is extremely facile, while the main points are not. The authors could have easily described their points with 4-5 sentences, but instead do so over 5-10 pages.
- constant references to later and previous chapters
One word: DISORGANIZED. there are constant references to previous and future chapters. Why not just focus on the explanation of the main point? For example, "[reading chapter 10] something about computation, oh and by the way this is similar to the concept we saw on chapter 2. something more about computation, do you remember what we learned in chapter 6?" This unorganized referencing is laden throughout the book. Just stick to the main point and explain it without these unnecessary reference fillers.
- the whole book could be written using 1/3 of the pages
As stated before, the book could have been written using 1/3 of it's pages. Long-winded explanations of simple concepts that could have been explained in a few paragraphs have been extended to a few pages; constant references to non-chapter concepts litter the relevant material, ultimately leaving the reader confused.
- overly emphasized parts when not necessary
Have you ever written an essay that you put so much background and introductory filler in, since you had to meet the page requirement? Multiply that by 10 and you will get an idea on what this book is about. Chapters never seem to get to the point - they are laden with page-long explanations on the history, background, and context of X. The filler is extremely facile, while the main points are not. The authors could have easily described their points with 4-5 sentences, but instead do so over 5-10 pages.
- constant references to later and previous chapters
One word: DISORGANIZED. there are constant references to previous and future chapters. Why not just focus on the explanation of the main point? For example, "[reading chapter 10] something about computation, oh and by the way this is similar to the concept we saw on chapter 2. something more about computation, do you remember what we learned in chapter 6?" This unorganized referencing is laden throughout the book. Just stick to the main point and explain it without these unnecessary reference fillers.
- the whole book could be written using 1/3 of the pages
As stated before, the book could have been written using 1/3 of it's pages. Long-winded explanations of simple concepts that could have been explained in a few paragraphs have been extended to a few pages; constant references to non-chapter concepts litter the relevant material, ultimately leaving the reader confused.
Displaying 1 of 1 review