{"title":"新范式是新范式吗?评论克瑙夫和加佐Castañeda (2023)","authors":"I. Douven","doi":"10.1080/13546783.2021.2017345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many cognitive psychologists have come to regard graded belief as fundamental to our understanding of how humans reason and many have also come to think of probability theory as providing at least part of the norms of correct reasoning. David Over has characterized this development as the emergence of a new paradigm in the Kuhnian sense. The target article argues that the choice of this term was unwarranted and also that it has done more harm than good. This commentary argues that there is nothing in Thomas Kuhn’s work to suggest that he would object to Over’s terminological choice and that there is no evidence that the choice has caused any harm.","PeriodicalId":47270,"journal":{"name":"Thinking & Reasoning","volume":"20 1","pages":"383 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the new paradigm a new paradigm? Commentary on Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2023)\",\"authors\":\"I. Douven\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13546783.2021.2017345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Many cognitive psychologists have come to regard graded belief as fundamental to our understanding of how humans reason and many have also come to think of probability theory as providing at least part of the norms of correct reasoning. David Over has characterized this development as the emergence of a new paradigm in the Kuhnian sense. The target article argues that the choice of this term was unwarranted and also that it has done more harm than good. This commentary argues that there is nothing in Thomas Kuhn’s work to suggest that he would object to Over’s terminological choice and that there is no evidence that the choice has caused any harm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thinking & Reasoning\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"383 - 388\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thinking & Reasoning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2021.2017345\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking & Reasoning","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2021.2017345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Is the new paradigm a new paradigm? Commentary on Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2023)
Abstract Many cognitive psychologists have come to regard graded belief as fundamental to our understanding of how humans reason and many have also come to think of probability theory as providing at least part of the norms of correct reasoning. David Over has characterized this development as the emergence of a new paradigm in the Kuhnian sense. The target article argues that the choice of this term was unwarranted and also that it has done more harm than good. This commentary argues that there is nothing in Thomas Kuhn’s work to suggest that he would object to Over’s terminological choice and that there is no evidence that the choice has caused any harm.