Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-25T04:12:06.855Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nominal Definitions of ‘Culture‘

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Omar Khayyam Moore
Omar Khayyam Moore*
Affiliation:
Tufts College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many social scientists report that they find it difficult to frame adequate definitions of the important terms of the field. At present they are definition-shy. It is the purpose of this paper to show that this avoidance reaction is neither necessary nor desirable as a means for advancing social science. In order that this be made clear, an analysis of an important term will be presented. First, however, a few preparatory questions about the technique of defining must be asked and answered.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , October 1952 , pp. 245 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © 1952, The Williams & Wilkins Company

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

I wish to thank Dr. Richard Rudner of Tufts College, Systems Coordination Project, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C. for his constructive criticisms of this article.

References

(1) Davis, and Havighurst, , “Social Class and Color Differences in Child Rearing,” American Sociological Review, Dec. 1946, V.XI, No. 6, pp. 698–710.Google Scholar
(2) Ibid., p. 699.Google Scholar
(3) Ibid., p. 700.Google Scholar
(4) Ibid., p. 700.Google Scholar
(5) Herskovits, M. J., Man and His Works, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1949, p. 25.Google Scholar
(6) Mead, Margaret, Co-operation and Competition Among Primitive Peoples, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc. New York and London, 1937, p. 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar