Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate
This paper features an interdisciplinary debate and dialogue about the nature of mind, perception, and rationality. Scholars from a range of disciplines—cognitive science, applied and experimental psychology, behavioral economics, biology and physiology—offer critiques and commentaries of a target a...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Published: |
Springer US
2017
|
| _version_ | 1826292603253948416 |
|---|---|
| author | Charter, N Felin, T Funder, D Gigerenzer, G Koenderink, J Krueger, J Noble, D Nordli, S Oaksford, M Schwartz, B Stanovich, K Todd, P |
| author_facet | Charter, N Felin, T Funder, D Gigerenzer, G Koenderink, J Krueger, J Noble, D Nordli, S Oaksford, M Schwartz, B Stanovich, K Todd, P |
| author_sort | Charter, N |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | This paper features an interdisciplinary debate and dialogue about the nature of mind, perception, and rationality. Scholars from a range of disciplines—cognitive science, applied and experimental psychology, behavioral economics, biology and physiology—offer critiques and commentaries of a target article by Felin, Koenderink and Krueger (2017), “Rationality, perception, and the all-seeing eye,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. The commentaries raise a number of criticisms and issues about rationality and the all-seeing eye argument, including: the nature of judgment and reasoning, biases versus heuristics, organism-environment relations, perception and situational construal, equilibrium analysis in economics, efficient markets, and the nature of empirical observation and the scientific method. The debated topics have far-reaching consequences for the rationality literature specifically and the cognitive, psychological and economic sciences more broadly. The commentaries are followed by a response by the authors of the target article. The response is organized around three central issues: 1) the problem of cues, 2) what is the question? and 3) equilibria, $500 bills, and the axioms of rationality. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:17:15Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:b63819f0-3872-4d75-b06d-1390a021ab31 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T03:17:15Z |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | Springer US |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:b63819f0-3872-4d75-b06d-1390a021ab312022-03-27T04:39:20ZMind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debateJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:b63819f0-3872-4d75-b06d-1390a021ab31Symplectic Elements at OxfordSpringer US2017Charter, NFelin, TFunder, DGigerenzer, GKoenderink, JKrueger, JNoble, DNordli, SOaksford, MSchwartz, BStanovich, KTodd, PThis paper features an interdisciplinary debate and dialogue about the nature of mind, perception, and rationality. Scholars from a range of disciplines—cognitive science, applied and experimental psychology, behavioral economics, biology and physiology—offer critiques and commentaries of a target article by Felin, Koenderink and Krueger (2017), “Rationality, perception, and the all-seeing eye,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. The commentaries raise a number of criticisms and issues about rationality and the all-seeing eye argument, including: the nature of judgment and reasoning, biases versus heuristics, organism-environment relations, perception and situational construal, equilibrium analysis in economics, efficient markets, and the nature of empirical observation and the scientific method. The debated topics have far-reaching consequences for the rationality literature specifically and the cognitive, psychological and economic sciences more broadly. The commentaries are followed by a response by the authors of the target article. The response is organized around three central issues: 1) the problem of cues, 2) what is the question? and 3) equilibria, $500 bills, and the axioms of rationality. |
| spellingShingle | Charter, N Felin, T Funder, D Gigerenzer, G Koenderink, J Krueger, J Noble, D Nordli, S Oaksford, M Schwartz, B Stanovich, K Todd, P Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title | Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title_full | Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title_fullStr | Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title_short | Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate |
| title_sort | mind rationality and cognition an interdisciplinary debate |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chartern mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT felint mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT funderd mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT gigerenzerg mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT koenderinkj mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT kruegerj mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT nobled mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT nordlis mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT oaksfordm mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT schwartzb mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT stanovichk mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate AT toddp mindrationalityandcognitionaninterdisciplinarydebate |