Document Type

Research

Abstract

First may I say that I do not feel that I have been advocating dualism, nor do I believe that Dr. Freeman believes that I have been advocating dualism. I have, however, been advocating caution and the necessity for more spade work (i.e. parametric studies) both at the animal and human level in order to determine empirically, as I put it in my paper, "what sorts of generalizations the differences and similarities between the behavior of (animals) and men will allow." Until we know what these "differences and similarities" are, I think we would be well advised to hold back on our willingness to generalize. Premature generalization, it seems to me, tends to stifle new ways of approaching known data and also tends to discourage vigorous exploration of relatively uncharted areas of behavior which do not appear to fit some highly cathected and well established model. I suspect that with a few minutes private conversation, Dr. Freeman and I would find that we have much in agreement on these matters.

Publication Date

1957

Journal Title

Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science

Volume

Issue

First Page

588

Last Page

588

Copyright

Language

File Format

application/pdf

Recommended Citation

Otis, Leon S. (1957) "A Reply to Dr. Freeman," Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science, 64(1), 588-588.
Available at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/pias/vol64/iss1/75

Download

Comments?

COinS

A Reply to Dr. Freeman

Authors