Abstract

The following work seeks to demonstrate the ways in which a discipline's philosophical conception of science defines not only its method, but indeed, its entire academic structure. Traditionally, scientific empiricism has been viewed as the only legitimate conception of science within psychology, however, by challenging this view, it is found that empiricism represents a weak philosophical system upon which to base notions of rational inquiry. It is further suggested that the alternative of realist philosophy and implicated method take its place. By way of an example, the latter half of the work acts to demonstrate the ways in which empiricism has defined a number of maladaptive constructions within the realm of sport psychology, and how an adoption of the realist alternative may enable a more complete and rational understanding of the psychology of sport.