Three fallacies

Three fallacies in the rationality debate obscure the possibility for reconciling the opposed camps. I focus on how these fallacies arise in the view that subjects interpret their task differently from the experimenters (owing to the influence of conversational expectations). The themes are: first,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Behavioral and brain sciences 2000-10, Vol.23 (5), p.665-666
Main Author: Adler, Jonathan E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cognition & reasoning
Open Peer Commentary
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Three fallacies in the rationality debate obscure the possibility for reconciling the opposed camps. I focus on how these fallacies arise in the view that subjects interpret their task differently from the experimenters (owing to the influence of conversational expectations). The themes are: first, critical assessment must start from subjects' understanding; second, a modal fallacy; and third, fallacies of distribution.
ISSN:0140-525X
1469-1825
DOI:10.1017/S0140525X00223431