No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
When reasoning is persuasive but wrong
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 March 2011
Abstract
Mercier and Sperber (M&S) are correct that reasoning and argumentation are closely related. But they are wrong in arguing that this relationship is one of evolutionary adaptation. In fact, persuasive reasoning that is not veridical can be fatal to the individual and to the propagation of his or her genes, as well as to the human species as a whole.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011
References
Moscovici, S. & Zavalloni, M. (1969) The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
12:125–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1993) Dysrationalia: A new specific learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities
26(8):501–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanovich, K. E. (2009) What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., ed. (2002) Why smart people can be so stupid. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Reznitskaya, A. & Jarvin, L. (2007) Teaching for wisdom: What matters is not just what students know, but how they use it. London Review of Education
5(2):143–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
When reasoning is persuasive but wrong
Related commentaries (1)
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory