Comparative cognitive studies, not folk phylogeny, please

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (1):122-123 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Barresi & Moore (B&M) provide a useful tool for the comparative study of social cognition that could, however, be improved by more subtle analysis of first person information about intentional relations. Knowledge of misrepresentation also needs to be better handled within the theory. I urge skepticism about B&M's sweeping phylogenetic claims.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Folk psychology and cognitive architecture.Frances Egan - 1995 - Philosophy of Science 62 (2):179-96.
Explaining human cognitive autapomorphies.Thomas Suddendorf - 2008 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (2):147-148.
Animal cognition and animal minds.Colin Allen - 1997 - In Martin Carrier & Peter K. Machamer (eds.), Mindscapes: Philosophy, Science, and the Mind. Pittsburgh University Press.
Folk psychology as a theory.Ian Martin Ravenscroft - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Consciousness, folk psychology, and cognitive science.Alvin I. Goldman - 1993 - Consciousness and Cognition 2 (4):364-382.
Folk psychology.Shaun Nichols & Stephen P. Stich - 1994 - Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science:235--255.
Folk concepts and intuitions: From philosophy to cognitive science.Shaun Nichols - 2004 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8 (11):514-518.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-20

Downloads
36 (#385,000)

6 months
1 (#1,040,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Colin Allen
University of Pittsburgh

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations