scholarly journals Mental Logic and the Denials of Conjunctions and Disjunctions

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga

ABSTRACT: The mental models theory predicts that, while conjunctions are easier than disjunctions for individuals, when denied, conjunctions are harder than disjunctions. Khemlani, Orenes, and Johnson-Laird proved that this prediction is correct in their work of 2014. In this paper, I analyze their results in order to check whether or not they really affect the mental logic theory. My conclusion is that, although Khemlani et al.'s study provides important findings, such findings do not necessarily lead to questioning or to rejecting the mental logic theory.

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga

Abstract The double negation has always been considered by the logical systems from ancient times to the present. In fact, that is an issue that the current syntactic theories studying human reasoning, for example, the mental logic theory, address today. However, in this paper, I claim that, in the case of some languages such as Spanish, the double negation causes problems for the cognitive theories mainly based on formal schemata and supporting the idea of a universal syntax of thought in the human mind. Thus, I propose that, given those problems, semantic frameworks such as that of the mental models theory seem to be more appropriate for explaining the human inferential activity.


2019 ◽  
pp. 61-69
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga

This paper tries to explore possible relations and differences between three kinds of contemporary theories about cognition and language: the approaches supporting the idea that there is a mental logic, the mental models theory, and the frameworks based upon probability logic. That exploration is made here by means of the analytic sentences and the revision of the way each of those types of theories can deal with them. The conclusions seem to show that the three kinds of theories address such sentences in a similar manner, which can mean that there can be more links between them than thought.


2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga

There is an Aristotelian thesis that can be considered controversial. That is the thesis related to a denied conditional with only one propositional variable and in which, in addition, one of its clauses is also denied. While the thesis is not a tautology, people tend to accept it as true. Pfeifer’s approach can account for this fact. However, I try to show that this problem can also be explained from other alternative frameworks, in particular, from that of the mental models theory, that of López-Astorga based on the pragmatic phenomenon of conditional perfection, and that of the mental logic theory. Likewise, I indicate the difficulties regarding Aristotle’s thesis of the mental models theory and López-Astorga’s proposal, and conclude that the account of the mental logic theory is the strongest alternative to Pfeifer’s explanation and that what is clearly obvious is that conditional should not be materially interpreted.http://dx.doi.org/10.15304/ag.35.2.2542


Civilizar ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (31) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López Astorga

Undoubtedly, the mental models theory has become an important theory in cognitive science. This theory can predict and explain most of the experimental results that the literature of that field shows. This fact can lead one to think that human mental processes are essentially semantic and that the syntactic approaches can no longer be held. In this way, in this paper, I try to analyze a framework based on formal rules, the mental logic theory, which also seems consistent with the experimental results, and review some of the reasons that its proponents often give in order to prove that it is worth continuing to consider it as an explicative alternative to the mental models theory. However, I show that such reasons can be questioned from the mental models theory and that, therefore, they need to be explained in a clearer way.


1992 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 438-439
Author(s):  
Richard A. Griggs
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Vargas ◽  
Sergio Moreno-Rios ◽  
Candida Castro ◽  
Geoffrey Underwood

Author(s):  
John R. Wilson ◽  
Andrew Rutherford

This review points out confusion surrounding the concept and use of mental models from the viewpoints of both human factors and psychology. Noted are the ways in which the notion is conceived according to the needs and approaches of different specialties, and the relationships of mental models to other forms of knowledge representation are considered. The manner in which the human factors community has and should utilize the concept in applications across a number of fields is addressed and discussed in relation to the psychological perspective.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1006-1007 ◽  
pp. 1084-1091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ren Long ◽  
Yi Ting Zhang ◽  
Yu Hui Wang

Through the mental models, mental logic and raven's graphic reasoning test research, this paper deduced a series of graphic reasoning paradigm, and summarized the process of graphical reasoning. Through the demonstration of problem difficulty experiment and written report experiment, confirmed a high relevance between the graphic logic steps iteration and species and questions difficulty. Furthermore, reasoning order and default graphical reasoning paradigm have a high degree of agreement. Confirmed the rationality and widespread adaptability of graphic reasoning paradigms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document