Complexity provides a better explanation than probability for confidence in syllogistic inferences
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (1):91-91 (2009)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesErnest W. Adams (1996). Four Probability-Preserving Properties of Inferences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25 (1):1 - 24.
Jamie A. Prowse Turner & Valerie A. Thompson (2009). The Role of Training, Alternative Models, and Logical Necessity in Determining Confidence in Syllogistic Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 15 (1):69 – 100.
Graeme S. Halford & Glenda Andrews (2004). The Development of Deductive Reasoning: How Important is Complexity? Thinking and Reasoning 10 (2):123 – 145.
Ian Pratt-Hartmann (2008). On the Computational Complexity of the Numerically Definite Syllogistic and Related Logics. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (1):1 - 28.
Phil Corkum (forthcoming). Is Aristotle's Syllogistic a Logic? History and Philosophy of Logic.
D. Turner (2000). The Functions of Fossils: Inference and Explanation in Functional Morphology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 31 (1):193-212.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-02-13Total downloads25 ( #49,684 of 550,917 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
