scholarly journals Analytic Sentences, Cognition, and Language: Some Links between Current Theories

2019 ◽  
pp. 61-69
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Probability Logic ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
The Way ◽  
Mental Models Theory

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.

scholarly journals The Problems of the Mental Logic with the Double Negation: The Necessity of a Semantic Approach

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Semantic Approach ◽  
Cognitive Theories ◽  
Ancient Times ◽  
Syntactic Theories ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
Mental Models Theory

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.

scholarly journals Mental Logic and the Denials of Conjunctions and Disjunctions

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
Mental Models Theory

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.

scholarly journals There Can be a Syntax of Thought Related to Logical Forms

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 270-278
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Axiomatic System ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Basic Framework ◽  
The Way ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Abstract Nowadays, a very important theory, the mental models theory, is demonstrating that it is able to explain most of the results in reasoning experiments reported by the cognitive science literature. However, this has a consequence. The mental models theory is mainly focused on content and meaning, and its theses can lead to reject the idea that syntax plays a role in the human mind and that reasoning is logical. But, in this paper, I try to show that it is possible to accept the basic framework of the mental models theory and, at the same time, to continue to claim that there are syntactic and formal logical processes coherent with the way our mind works. To do that, I argue that, even accepting that the mental models theory describes correctly the processes why certain combinations of possibilities are detected, it can be stated that the relationships between such combinations indicated by the theory are consistent with, for example, the modal axiomatic system K.

Mental models theory and relevance theory in quantificational reasoning

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Nicolle
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Relevance Theory ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Linguistic Pragmatics ◽  
Procedural Information ◽  
Reasoning Tasks ◽  
The Way ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Human reasoning involving quantified statements is one area in which findings from cognitive psychology and linguistic pragmatics complement each other. I will show how mental models theory provides a promising account of the mechanisms underlying peoples’ performance in three types of reasoning tasks involving quantified premises and conclusions. I will further suggest that relevance theory can help to explain the way in which mental models are employed in the reasoning processes. Conversely, mental models theory suggests that human reasoning typically does not involve deductive rules, which in turn entails a modification to the nature of the deductive processes proposed by relevance theory. The mechanism proposed by mental models theory also helps to clarify the nature of the relevance theory distinction between conceptual and procedural information.

Against Philo’s interpretation of conditional. The case of Aristotle´s thesis

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Propositional Variable ◽  
Conditional Perfection ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
Mental Models Theory

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

scholarly journals Some arguments that the mental logic theory needs to clarify to continue being an alternative to the mental models theory

Civilizar ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (31) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Experimental Results ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
Formal Rules ◽  
Mental Models Theory

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.

Mental Logic Versus Mental Models

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

Deontic Reasoning, Mental Models Theory and Traffic Signs Information

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Vargas ◽  
Sergio Moreno-Rios ◽  
Candida Castro ◽  
Geoffrey Underwood
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Traffic Signs ◽  
Deontic Reasoning ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Interface, Interact, Improvact

2020 ◽  
pp. 57-78
Author(s):  
Kristian Kloeckl
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Interaction Design ◽  
Urban Environments ◽  
Design Domain ◽  
Human Machine Interaction ◽  
Ways Of Thinking ◽  
Machine Interaction ◽  
The Way

This chapter is dedicated to models of human-machine interaction (HCI) that have been influential for the design domain and that form the basis of how we think about designing human-machine interactions today. Digital networked technologies have become increasingly pervasive in today's urban environments. But regardless of the urban dimension, the domains of HCI and interaction design have long examined design approaches that take into account the ways in which humans relate to technologies. Different ways of thinking about the interaction between humans and machines have informed the way we work with technologies. The mental models one adopts when working with technologies contribute not only to how they are viewed but also to how these technologies are shaped in substantial ways.

Mental models, humorous texts and humour evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henri de Jongste
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Model Theory ◽  
Mental Model ◽  
Model Construction ◽  
Mental Model Theory ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Manipulation Process ◽  
The Way

Abstract This paper investigates how a mental-model theory of communication can explain differences in humorous texts and how aesthetic criteria to evaluate humour are dependent on the way mental models are exploited. Humour is defined as the deliberate manipulation by speakers of their private mental models of situations in order to create public mental models which contain one or more incongruities. Recipients can re-construct this manipulation process and thereby evaluate its nature and its quality. Humorous texts can be distinguished in terms of ownership of the manipulated mental model, the relationship between the speakers’ private and their public (humorous) mental model, as well as the speed required in the humorous mental model construction. Possible aesthetic criteria are the quality of the mental model manipulation, the pressure under which the humorously manipulated mental models have been constructed and the quality of the presentation of humorous mental models.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document