Talk:Folk taxonomy: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Joe Quick
(New page: {{subpages}} The categorization of this topic in the philosophy workgroup is open to interpretation. I included it because I consider this of interest to the field of epistemology but phi...)
 
imported>Joe Quick
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
The categorization of this topic in the philosophy workgroup is open to interpretation.  I included it because I consider this of interest to the field of epistemology but philosophers would know better than I. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 15:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
The categorization of this topic in the philosophy workgroup is open to interpretation.  I included it because I consider this of interest to the field of epistemology but philosophers would know better than I. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 15:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
:Never mind. I've recategorized the article as psychology instead of philosophy.  I think that's more appropriate. --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 19:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:34, 12 August 2009

This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Systems of categorization created by non-scientists to order and name the natural world. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories Anthropology, Psychology and Biology [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

The categorization of this topic in the philosophy workgroup is open to interpretation. I included it because I consider this of interest to the field of epistemology but philosophers would know better than I. --Joe Quick 15:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. I've recategorized the article as psychology instead of philosophy. I think that's more appropriate. --Joe Quick 19:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)