Simulation and cognitive penetrability

被引:19
作者
Heal, J
机构
[1] St. John's College
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.1468-0017.1996.tb00028.x
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Stich, Nichols et al. assert that the process of deriving predictions by simulation must be cognitively impenetrable. Hence, they claim, the occurrence of certain errors in prediction provides empirical evidence against simulation theory. But it is false that simulation-derived prediction must be cognitively impenetrable. Moreover the errors they cite, which are instances of irrationality, are not evidence against the (very defensible) version of simulation theory that takes the central domain of simulation to be intelligible transitions between states with content.
引用
收藏
页码:44 / 67
页数:24
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1995, FOLK PSYCHOL
[2]  
Anscombe G. E. M., 1957, INTENTION
[3]  
BLACKBURN S, 1995, THEORY OBSERVATION D, P274
[4]  
CARRUTHERS P, 1996, THEORIES THEORIES MI
[5]  
Collingwood R.G., 1994, IDEA HIST
[6]  
Davidson D, 1980, ESSAYS ACTIONS EVENT
[7]  
Davies M., 1995, MENTAL SIMULATION
[8]  
de Sousa R., 1987, The Rationality of Emotion, DOI 10.7551/mitpress/5760.001.0001
[9]  
GOLDMAN AI, 1995, INTERPRETATION PSYCH
[10]  
GOLDMAN AI, 1995, DEFENCE SIMULATION T