[ExI] persuasion and/or argument

[Stefano Vaj]

On 26 May 2011 20:53, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> "Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory" in BEHAVIORAL
> AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2011) 34, 57–111 by Hugo Mercie, University of
> Pennsylvania hmercier at sas.upenn.edu <
> http://sites.google.com/site/hugomercier/>
> and Dan Sperber, Jean Nicod Institute(EHESS-ENS-CNRS), 75005Paris, France;
> Department  of Philosophy, Central EuropeanUniversity, Budapest, Hungary
> dan at sperber.fr <http://www.dan.sperber.fr >
>
> Abstract: Reasoning is generally seen as a means to improve knowledge and
> make better decisions. However, much evidence shows that reasoning often
> leads to epistemic distortions and poor decisions. This suggests that the
> function of reasoning should be rethought. Our hypothesis is that the
> function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate
> arguments intended to persuade.
>

Why, this is pretty obvious to those amongst us who practise law for a
living, is it not? :-)))

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110530/c767af44/attachment.html>