Distinguish among a scientific fact, a hypothesis, a law and a theory. A Scientific fact is something that competent observers can observe and agree to be true. A Hypothesis is and educated guess or a reasonable explanation. A law is scientific hypothesis that has been tested over and over again and has not been contradicted. Also known as a principle.
The primary precepts are a set of tenants that are vague in their interpret-ability on how they are to be executed. They are discovered through the use of reason and as such are 'Teleological' or only focus on the consequence rather than the action. However the secondary precepts are derived from the primary precepts and are very similar to the ten commandments or the 'Decalogue' (found in the Bible in Exodus 20). These are very absolutist and are therefore 'Deontological' which means that the cause for concern is the action and not the consequence. This is beneficial to a scoeity as they would be able to establish common laws and rules.
Can the outcomes of nonparametric tests be generalized to populations? Nonparametric tests must be used when the data don’t satisfy the normal assumption of the parametric test. They can also be used for medians or for contingency tables that don’t fall into any distribution. Nonparametric tests are useful because they don’t assume any particular distribution. I can use them when my data is non-normal, such as in a test for means.
One fact that Devilly and Cotton stated that was clear is that CISD and CISM have to be classified as a falsifiable intervention system that have the same meaning until each can be defined clearly. Also the long term pathology of CISD and CISM has not been proven so the interventions can possible result in inconsistent results (Halgin, 2007). * Mitchell believes that emergency intervention is a supportive service not psychotherapy or a alternate for psychotherapy. Another important fact stated by Mitchell is that crisis intervention is the assessment that gives individuals the opportunity to obtain needed services and recommendation for treatment such as cognitive behavior treatment (Halgin, 2007). * * 2.
In simple terms , a law describes what nature does under certain conditions, and will predict what will happen as long as those conditions are met. Can not be changed. Theories have a few similarities to a scientific law, but is the opposite when it comes to the rest. Theories are a body of knowledge and explanatory concepts that seek to increase our understanding a major phenomena in nature (Moore, 1984). A scientifically accepted general principle supported by a substantial body of evidence offered to provide an explanation of observed facts and as a basis for future discussion or investigation (Lincoln et al.,1990).
This is because they would enable a decision about whether clinical intervention may be needed Furthermore a weakness of ideal mental health is mental illnesses cannot be defined in the same way as physical illnesses. A physical illness will have physical causes e.g. virus or bacterial infection which are easy to diagnose. However
Rosenhan’s (1973) ‘pseudopatient’ experiment shows this. It also avoids the Hawthorne effect. However, there is little control over the variables in real life situations, therefor this method lacks reliability. The causes that are identified may
Husserl vs. Bergson: Conception and Perception of Time Edmund Husserl holds the notion that time cannot be calculated without bias, meaning that the suggestion of ability to encapsulate time inside a collection of prearranged components such as minutes or seconds, is impractical. The concept of time isn’t intended to be detained, but is something that can’t be summarized in this approach. Despite the fact that Edmund Husserl does not objectify time by means of segmented measures, such as seconds or minutes, he has to classify it in some shape or form to bring the discussion to the table. In communication concerning the concept of time, we are then able to infer that each individual instant in time holds its own position, relative to all of the other previous instances, and also, to the current moment. If this was a false truth, we wouldn’t be aware of the variations between the years.
4.5. does the fact that there is supporting material from experience for a statement make that statement reliable? 4.6. do all scientific hypothesis and theories arise from experiences( theory of relativity, double helix structure of DNA) 4. These questions suggest that the standard image of science is largely discredited and is replaced by new views...(popper, Kuhn) The contribution of Karl
Another weakness is the consequences, in some situations when consequences are too severe that many think it is better to break a rule than allow awful thing to happen. The theory is too rigid, sometimes the consequences can change the rightness or a wrongness of an action, but in this theory the person is judged on the action which can be unfair. It’s inflexible as you should be able to break a rule if the individual’s circumstances warrant it. There is no consideration to human emotion, there are situation where individuals break rules because of emotions, for example if a person is scared they may lie to protect themselves which in Kant’s eyes this would be morally wrong. The theory is a priori, some claim we out our duty a priori but it is also argued we need to refer to experience to work out what is right.