Pricing
Learning Disability
The concept of multiple approaches is accepted over that of any single approach with the understanding that no approach is considered to be inherently superior to another, and that the decision about what approach to take depends on the purpose of the particular research as well as the intellectual bent the individual researcher finds most appealing.
Abstract
The study of learning disability represents a special case of the study of mind (see Note 1). As such —and without wishing to invoke age-old arguments about materialism, reductionism, or dualism, but rather to consider the study of learning disability as a legitimate concern of modern biology—multiple approaches are preferred. The concept of multiple approaches is accepted over that of any single approach with the understanding that no approach is considered to be inherently superior to another, and that the decision about what approach to take depends on the purpose of the particular research as well as the intellectual bent the individual researcher finds most appealing. Some, for instance, prefer to describe behavior in terms of memory, syntax, and perception, while others are happier with concepts like synaptic facilitation, axonal depolarization, and genomic transcription. And, in the light of the present discussion, some would prefer to understand reading problems in terms of classroom size and composition, or graphemic-phonemic correspondences and phonological awareness, or even in terms of developmental plasticity and interhemispheric relationships. Most would require, however, that any approach be scientific and, moreover, compatible with the eventual goal of understanding the descriptive language of one in terms of the language of another. Science, after all, advances by consensus, and the agreement about a topic among workers in widely different disciplines represents the best type of consensus.