Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T22:20:45.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The argumentative theory of reasoning applies to scientists and philosophers, too

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2011

John A. Johnson
John A. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, DuBois, PA 15801. [email protected]://www.personal.psu.edu/~j5j/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Logical consistency demands that Mercier and Sperber's (M&S's) argumentative theory of reasoning apply to their own reasoning in the target article. Although they hint that their argument applies to professional reasoners such as scientists and philosophers, they do not develop this idea. In this commentary, I discuss the applicability of argumentative theory to science and philosophy, emphasizing the perils of moral reasoning.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 81 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Greene, J. D. (2003) From neural “is” to moral “ought”: What are the moral implications of neuroscientific moral psychology? Nature Reviews: Neuroscience 4:847–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haidt, J. (2001) The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 108(4):814–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, J. A. (2007, June) The evolution of moral rules from natural laws. Poster presented at the 19th annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, Williamsburg, VA.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. A., Germer, C. K., Efran, J. S. & Overton, W. F. (1988) Personality as the basis for theoretical predilections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55:824–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, B. R. (1972) Psychological man as scientist, humanist and specialist. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 6:95–118.Google Scholar
Tomkins, S. S. (1965) Affect and the psychology of knowledge. In: Affect, cognition, and personality: Empirical studies, ed. Tomkins, S. S. & Izard, C. E., pp. 72–97. Springer.Google Scholar