SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Abstract

Afrer noting some areas of common ground, in particular my acceptance of the fact that causal analysis is not sufficient to capture motivation and meaning, the main disagreement is pinpointed: in my view causal explanations are relevant to human actions. In response to Gergen's contention that cross-cultural replications have no bearing on theories, which essentially turn on language games, I submit that his account of cross-cultural work is in several respects misleading. It is suggested that ignoring the striking regularities of social behaviour runs the risk of a return to empty scholasticism.