David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The purpose of this study is to describe a conceptual framework for cognitive distortions, which notably allows to specify more accurately their intrinsic relationships. This conceptual framework aims at inserting itself within the apparatus of cognitive therapy and of critical thinking. The present analysis is based on the following fundamental concepts: the reference class, the duality and the system of taxa. With the help of these three notions, each cognitive distortion can be defined. A distinction is also made between, on the one hand, general cognitive distortions and on the other hand, specific cognitive distortions. The present model allows then to define within the same conceptual framework the general cognitive distortions such as dichotomous reasoning, disqualifying a given pole, minimisation and maximisation. It also allows to describe as specific cognitive distortions: disqualifying the positive, selective abstraction and catastrophism. Furthermore, the present model predicts the existence of two other general cognitive distortions: the omission of the neutral and requalifying in the other pole.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Nigel Stepp, Anthony Chemero & Michael T. Turvey (2011). Philosophy for the Rest of Cognitive Science. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):425-437.
Carlos Hernandez, Ricardo Sanz & Ignacio Lopez, Consciosusness in Cognitive Architectures. A Principled Analysis of Rcs, Soar and Act-R.
Gayle Porter (2010). Work Ethic and Ethical Work: Distortions in the American Dream. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 96 (4):535 - 550.
Herlinde Pauer-Studer & J. David Velleman (2011). Distortions of Normativity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (3):329-356.
Rebecca Kukla (1992). Cognitive Models and Representation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43 (2):219-32.
Paul Thagard (2009). Why Cognitive Science Needs Philosophy and Vice Versa. Topics in Cognitive Science 1 (2):237-254.
Jakob Hohwy & Raben Rosenberg (2005). Cognitive Neuropsychiatry: Conceptual, Methodological and Philosophical Perspectives. World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 6 (3):192-197.
Mark Whipple (2005). The Dewey-Lippmann Debate Today: Communication Distortions, Reflective Agency, and Participatory Democracy. Sociological Theory 23 (2):156-178.
Keld Stehr Nielsen (2006). Dynamical Explanation in Cognitive Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (1):139 - 163.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #174,287 of 1,696,808 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #187,594 of 1,696,808 )
How can I increase my downloads?