Educative . Rehabilitation Science on Thb Scientific Continuum

The author first determines the Goncept of epistemology with the aim of utilizing its method to analyze the position of educative-rehabilitation science on the scientific continuum. This analysis is carried out according to the criteria of scientificness, i.e.: (1) science as a process, (2) methodology, (3) verification or refutation, (4) coherence, (5) nomotheticity, (5) predictability, and (7) general acceptability. On the basis of these criteria, the author determines paradigmatically the position of three sciences on the scientific continuum, beginning with psychology and psychoanalysis, and then dedicating the majority of the article to the position of defectology on the continuum. In addition, he comes to the conclusion that, although the position of defectology (or educative-rehabilitation science) on the scientific continuum is not especially high-it does not correspond to the position taken by the exact sciences-at least it is not lower, but in some cases higher (according to some of the criteria), than some of the traditional sciences. The author considers this type of analysis to be necessary in order to improve the position of educative-rehabilitation science in terms of those criteria of scientificness according to which its position is inadequate.