Logical normativity and the psychology of reasoning
This paper aims to analyze the relevance of the psychology of deductive reasoning in the debate on the normativity of logic. I will present three different psychological theories that, in their ways, distinguish between “easy” and “hard” logical inferences. Then, I will argue that some of the most c...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español Inglés |
| Publicado: |
ARFIL y UNL
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/index/article/view/14256 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | This paper aims to analyze the relevance of the psychology of deductive reasoning in the debate on the normativity of logic. I will present three different psychological theories that, in their ways, distinguish between “easy” and “hard” logical inferences. Then, I will argue that some of the most common difficulties in understanding the normativity of logic can be solved using these distinctions. I conclude that a virtuous dialogue between the psychology of reasoning and the normativity of logic is possible. |
|---|