ABSTRACT
Philosophers who have argued that psychology could account for consciousness or for choice have sometimes supported their arguments by reference to features psychological explanations are alleged to have that they employ causal laws, that they are concerned only with motions, that they are concerned only with aberrant behaviour, that they consist solely in the delineation of stimulus-response connections. The classification and diagnosis of exhibitions of our mental impotences require specialized research methods. The explanation of the exhibitions of our mental competences often requires nothing but ordinary good sense, or it may require the specialized methods of economists, scholars, strategists and examiners. It is clear that Gilbert Ryle has been careful not to burn his bridges. Neurological structures are models of certain functionally characterized relations. J. A. Deutsch, has argued persuasively that the production of adequate phase one theories exhausts the psychologist's professional responsibilities.
