1. Inter alia, see May Brodbeck (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences (New York, 1968), sec. 4;
2. and Ernest Nagel, The Structure of Science (New York, 1961), pp. 535ff.
3. C. West Churchman, The Design of Inquiring Systems (New York, 1971), ch. 10;
4. and Margaret A. Boden, Purposive Explanation in Psychology (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), on which see the perceptive review by William P. Alston, in Science, vol. 7 (21 July 1972), pp. 251–2.
5. Nagel (see note 1, above), passim; and Sherman Roy Krupp (ed.), The Structure of Economic Science (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1966), pp. 68–82. To go a step further, it is not unrealistic to suggest that there are probably three (rather than C. P. Snow’s two) cultures — natural science, the humanities, and social science — with the third characterized by an amorphous blend of types of social thought. The social sciences have not merely emulated the physical.