The empirical case for two systems of reasoning

Psychological Bulletin 119 (1):3-22 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Distinctions have been proposed between systems of reasoning for centuries. This article distills properties shared by many of these distinctions and characterizes the resulting systems in light of recent findings and theoretical developments. One system is associative because its computations reflect similarity structure and relations of temporal contiguity. The other is "rule based" because it operates on symbolic structures that have logical content and variables and because its computations have the properties that are normally assigned to rules. The systems serve complementary functions and can simultaneously generate different solutions to a reasoning problem. The rule-based system can suppress the associative system but not completely inhibit it. The article reviews evidence in favor of the distinction and its characterization

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A causal framework for integrating learning and reasoning.David A. Lagnado - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (2):211-212.
Dual-Process and Dual-System Theories of Reasoning.Keith Frankish - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (10):914-926.
Common Sense Reasoning About Beliefs.Gezina Cornelia Stein - 1996 - Dissertation, New Mexico State University
Do we need two systems for reasoning?Klaus Oberauer - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):692-693.
Educating for Practical Reasoning.Thomas Magnell - 2001 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 11:233-239.
Hypothesis Testing Analysis.Mikael Eriksson - 2008 - Sorites 20:141-156.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-05-26

Downloads
57 (#251,825)

6 months
6 (#202,901)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?