Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (5):629-630 (2002)

Authors
Joana Ramos
Universidade de Coimbra
Abstract
The “new” paradigm proposed by Shanker & King is neither new nor a significant advance in our understanding of communication. Although we agree that social interaction is important, ignoring the roles of mental processes and the significance of information exchange is theoretically dangerous. Moreover, the “communicative dance” is sequential. If one partner does not lead, how is the other to follow?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x02320119
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How Bad Is Rape?H. E. Baber - 1987 - Hypatia 2 (2):125-138.
The Hiddenness Argument Revisited.J. L. Schellenberg - 2005 - Religious Studies 41 (3):287-303.
Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents.Peter J. Taylor - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304-310.
The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism.Tang Yijie & Yan Xin - 2008 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477-501.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
24 ( #470,465 of 2,497,979 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,301 of 2,497,979 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes