Is this what the debate on rules was about?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):25-26 (2005)
Abstract
The key weakness of the proposed distinction between rules and similarity is that it effectively converts what was previously seen as a consequence of rule or similarity-based processing, into a definition of rule and similarity themselves – evidence is elevated into a conceptual distinction. This conflicts with fundamental intuitions about processes and erodes the relevance of the debate across cognitive science.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0140525X05340015
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 31,385
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
15 ( #354,638 of 2,225,944 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #425,621 of 2,225,944 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature