On Methodological Distinctions

Abstract

What follows is a critical review of Windelband's methodological distinction between nomothetic and idiographic thought as based on Lamiell's translation of Windelband's (1894/1998) `History and Natural Science'. This is followed by a critique of Lamiell's (1998) interpretation of the distinction and its implications for his proposed nomothetic psychology of personality. In the course of evaluating this proposal, Windelband's distinction is placed within the broader context of the neo-Kantian understanding of science, history and philosophy, and briefly contrasted with Dilthey's epistemological distinction between the human and natural sciences which takes psychology, and our understanding of individual persons, as belonging to the human, which is to say, historical sciences.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.