David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Thinking and Reasoning 11 (1):5 – 33 (2005)
The explanation of the suppression of Modus Ponens inferences within the framework of linguistic pragmatics and of plausible reasoning (i.e., deduction from uncertain premises) is defended. First, this approach is expounded, and then it is shown that the results of the first experiment of Byrne, Espino, and Santamar a (1999) support the uncertainty explanation but fail to support their counterexample explanation. Second, two experiments are presented. In the first one, aimed to refute one objection regarding the conclusions observed, the additional conditional premise ( if N, C ) was replaced with a statement of uncertainty ( it is not certain that N ); the answers produced by the participants remained qualitatively and quantitatively similar in both conditions. In the second experiment, a fine-grained analysis of the responses to and justifications for an evaluation task was performed. The results of both experiments strongly supported the uncertainty explanation.
|Keywords||psychology of reasoning - defeasible reasoning - deduction - linguistic pragmatics|
|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
Fabrizio Cariani & Lance J. Rips (2016). Conditionals, Context, and the Suppression Effect. Cognitive Science 40 (5):n/a-n/a.
J. Baratgin, D. Over & G. Politzer (2014). New Psychological Paradigm for Conditionals and General de Finetti Tables. Mind and Language 29 (1):73-84.
Niki Pfeifer & Igor Douven (2013). Formal Epistemology and the New Paradigm Psychology of Reasoning. Review of Philosophy and Psychology (2):1-23.
Guy Politzer (2007). Reasoning with Conditionals. Topoi 26 (1):79-95.
Politzer Guy & Bonnefon Jean-Francois (2006). Two Varieties of Conditionals and Two Kinds of Defeaters Help Reveal Two Fundamental Types of Reasoning. Mind and Language 21 (4):484-503.
Similar books and articles
Mary R. Newsome & P. N. Johnson-Laird (2006). How Falsity Dispels Fallacies. Thinking and Reasoning 12 (2):214 – 234.
H. N. Pollack (2003). Uncertain Science ...: Uncertain World. Cambridge University Press.
Mohan Matthen (2009). Drift and “Statistically Abstractive Explanation”. Philosophy of Science 76 (4):464-487.
Jean-Francois Bonnefon & Denis J. Hilton (2002). The Suppression of Modus Ponens as a Case of Pragmatic Preconditional Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 8 (1):21 – 40.
Assaf Sharon & Levi Spectre (2013). Epistemic Closure Under Deductive Inference: What is It and Can We Afford It? Synthese 190 (14):2731-2748.
Rebecca McKenzie, Jonathan St B. T. Evans & Simon J. Handley (2011). Autism and Performance on the Suppression Task: Reasoning, Context and Complexity. Thinking and Reasoning 17 (2):182 - 196.
Rosemary J. Stevenson & David E. Over (2001). Reasoning From Uncertain Premises: Effects of Expertise and Conversational Context. Thinking and Reasoning 7 (4):367 – 390.
Christian George (1997). Reasoning From Uncertain Premises. Thinking and Reasoning 3 (3):161 – 189.
Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Walter Schroyens & Gery D'Ydewalle (2000). Strategies During Complex Conditional Inferences. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (2):125 – 160.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #159,094 of 1,911,312 )
Recent downloads (6 months)11 ( #54,065 of 1,911,312 )
How can I increase my downloads?