title: Psychology is still a problematic science and the public knows it.
abstract: According to the philosophers of science Hempel and Oppenheim (1948), who were cited appropriately by Lilienfeld (see record 2011-12007-001) in his article, scientific explanations serve to answer "why" questions. Clarifying the logic of explanations in the sciences, they developed famously the notion that phenomena can be explained (using deduction) by means of general laws and by means of certain antecedent conditions. What is evident from all we know from the philosophy of science is that Lilienfeld offered us an interpretation. Although Lilienfeld provided good arguments and good reasons for the explanandum (e.g., why the public is skeptical toward psychology), citing studies and data, he clearly did not provide a deductive-nomological explanation in the sense of Hempel and Oppenheim or in the sense of the natural sciences.
authors.affiliation: York University.
authors.forename: Thomas
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Teo
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D011584:Psychology; D011639:Public Opinion; D012586:Science