Linda问题:"齐当别"抉择模型的解释

大量有关人类归因判断的研究表明,人类经常违反理性概率公理.Tversky和Kahneman(1983)使用Linda问题等特定场景的研究发现,人们系统性地表现出违反理性推断标准,判断合取事件发生概率大于其组成事件发生概率,称之为合取谬误,并用人们使用代表性启发式判断概率来解释该现象产生的原因.然而使用启发式观点对合取谬误现象进行解释过于模糊不清.该文首先介绍了合取谬误现象及其解释模型,然后应用Li(1994,2004)提出的不确定情形下决策理论--"齐当别"抉择模型对Linda问题中合取谬误产生的原因进行了新的解释.     

A Theory of Truthmaker Content I: Conjunction,Disjunction and Negation

I develop a basic theory of content within the framework of truthmaker semantics and, in the second part, consider some of the applications to subject matter, common content, logical subtraction and ground.     

Linda问题：“齐当别”抉择模型的解释

大量有关人类归因判断的研究表明,人类经常违反理性概率公理。Tversky和Kahneman（1983）使用Linda问题等特定场景的研究发现,人们系统性地表现出违反理性推断标准,判断合取事件发生概率大于其组成事件发生概率,称之为合取谬误,并用人们使用代表性启发式判断概率来解释该现象产生的原因。然而使用启发式观点对合取谬误现象进行解释过于模糊不清。该文首先介绍了合取谬误现象及其解释模型,然后应用Li（1994,2004）提出的不确定情形下决策理论——“齐当别”抉择模型对Linda问题中合取谬误产生的原因进行了新的解释     

问题解决中图式与策略的关系:来自表征复杂性模型的说明

采用口语报告法收集了26名小学三年级儿童解决两道复杂的算术应用题时的口语报告和作业资料,探讨了问题解决中图式与策略的关系。结果发现,对二者关系的解释要以问题表征复杂性为中介：如果被试的关系图式水平较高,表征复杂性(特别是表征深度)也会较大,相应会选择领域专门性更强的快捷策略;如果缺乏必需的关系图式。表征深度就降低,甚至不能正确表征问题,这时只好使用常规策略甚至错误策略。这个结论适用于有多种表征和解题方式的问题中。     

概念范畴情境化视角下的Linda问题初探

摘 要：本文首先提出了Linda问题的概念范畴情境化视角。该视角认为,Linda问题中的T与F的范畴与分别同T&F中T与F的范畴并不一定相同,当T&F中的T和F至少有一者的范畴较相应的T或F有较大的扩大,且同时另外一者至少较相应T或F有略微的扩大时,就有可能导致T&F>T或T&F>F为合理判断而非谬误的情形,因而至少不能将所有的T&F>或T&F>F的判断都归为谬误。本文通过三项研究发现,被试对T&F中T与F和T与F的专业性判断并不完全相同;排除女权的专业性合取事件<女权的专业性独立呈现且出纳的专业性合取事件<出纳的专业性独立呈现者,所谓谬误水平显著下降;对Linda问题的排序项增加“专业的或职业的”限定词,以增加相应概念范畴的稳定性,显著减少合取谬误。这些结果说明,Linda问题的概念范畴情境化视角获得了支持。     

The Logic of Multisets Continued: The Case of Disjunction

We continue our work [5] on the logic of multisets (or on the multiset semantics of linear logic), by interpreting further the additive disjunction . To this purpose we employ a more general class of processes, called free, the axiomatization of which requires a new rule (not compatible with the full LL), the cancellation rule. Disjunctive multisets are modeled as finite sets of multisets. The -Horn fragment of linear logic, with the cut rule slightly restricted, is sound with respect to this semantics. Another rule, which is a slight modification of cancellation, added to HF makes the system sound and complete.     

确定、不确定及风险状态下选择反转:“齐当别”选择方式的解释

应用广义“弱优势”（weak dominance）模型检验确定、不确定及风险状态下的选择反转现象。该模型将人们的二择一选择行为描述为一种搜寻一备择方案在主观上优越于另一备择方案的过程。即：在甲方案在某一维度上优越于乙方案,而乙方案在另一维度上优越于甲方案的情况下,为了利用“弱优势”（weak dominance）原则达成决策,人们必须在一维度上将两者间较小的差异人为地“齐同”掉,而在另一维度上将“辨别”两者间较大的差异作为最终选择的依据。因此,在每次选择时,如果不认为最大的差异都是来自同一维度,就会导致选择反转。此项研究设计了一“匹配”任务,并借此检验,在不同的决策状态下,判断两备择方案在各维度上的差异是否能预测人们的重复选择变异。总的测试-再测试结果支持“齐当别”选择方式的解释。其发现表明：重复选择之所以可能是一致的,并不是因为每次都认定被选中的备择方案具有最大值,而是因为每次选择都认定最大的差异来自一固定的维度。     

论数学问题解决中情境模型与问题模型的关系

情境模型与问题模型是数学问题解决研究中的两个重要概念,前者是对问题所述情境的日常化的定性表征,后者是基于图式知识对问题关键变量的数量关系表征。本文介绍了两种模型的发展历史以及目前存在的争议,并提出了未来研究需要解决的问题。     

The Pragma-Dialectical Approach to the Fallacies Revisited

This article explains the design and development of the pragma-dialectical approach to fallacies. In this approach fallacies are viewed as violations of the standards for critical discussion that are expressed in a code of conduct for reasonable argumentative discourse. After the problem-solving validity in resolving differences of opinion of the rules of this code has been discussed, their conventional validity for real-life arguers is demonstrated. Starting from the extended version of the theory in which the strategic maneuvering taking place in argumentative discourse is included, the article explains that the violations of the rules that are committed in the fallacies involve derailments of strategic maneuvering. This culminates in a discussion of the exploitation of hidden fallaciousness as an unreasonable way of increasing the effectiveness of argumentative discourse – a vital topic of research in present-day pragma-dialectics.

     

Mill's Fallacies: Theory and Examples

In noting contemporary neglect of Mill's work on fallacy, Hansen and Pinto say that his account is tied more closely to scientific methodology than to problems of public discourse and everyday argumentation. This paper re-examines Mill's fallacies from a rhetorical perspective, assessing the extent to which his examples – drawn from the domains of popular superstition, science, philosophy, and public discussion – fit his theoretical structure. In articulating the relationship between Mill's philosophical assumptions and the discursive practices of the fields from which he draws his examples, it will suggest the ambiguities in Mill's mentalistic, rationalistic, inductivist approach and the inescapable rhetoricity of his examples.     

The Disjunction Effect and Reason-Based Choice in Games

This paper reports an experiment that extends previous find ings of the disjunction effect, sometimes described as a violation of Savage's sure-thing principle. Evidence of the disjunction ef fect is observed using elicited beliefs about others' actions (rather than controlled beliefs) in a prisoners' dilemma studied by Shafir and Tversky (1992) as well as in an asymmetric version of it and in a nondilemma game with a unique equilibrium. Debiasing tech niques as well as implications for these extensions are discussed.     

The Two Fallacies of Gamblers: Type I and Type II

The so-called "gambler′s fallacy" asserts that gamblers believe mechanical randomizers (such as roulette) exhibit sequential tendencies. In this paper we introduce another false belief of gamblers, namely the tendency to bet on a winning number under the assumption that the roulette wheel is biased. We discuss the proper analysis for detecting biased numbers and demonstrate empirically that people notoriously underestimate the number of observations needed for a reliable detection of biased numbers. We label this bias as the Type II gambler′s fallacy and suggest that both types of the fallacy are due to misperceptions of randomness. Implications for real life situations are briefly discussed.     

The Linguistic Formulation of Fallacies Matters: The Case of Causal Connectives

Argumentation - While the role of discourse connectives has long been acknowledged in argumentative frameworks, these approaches often take a coarse-grained approach to connectives, treating them...     

Linda Nicholson's The Play of Reason: From the Modern to the Postmodern

Nicholson's political philosophy is distinctively grounded in history. The Play of Reason: From the Modern to the Postmodern argues that such “grounding” phys as much of the foundational role demanded of philosophy as can coherently be played by anything—and that such a foundation is, pragmatically, enough. I focus on two moves: (1) thinking historically as a model for thinking cross‐culturally, and (2) historicizing “all the way down,” as a way of exorcising the demand for the ahistorical grounding of epistemology.     

Importance and Explanatory Relevance: The Case of Mathematical Explanations

A way to argue that something (e.g. mathematics, idealizations, moral properties, etc.) plays an explanatory role in science is by linking explanatory relevance with importance in the context of an explanation. The idea is deceptively simple: a part of an explanation is an explanatorily relevant part of that explanation if removing it affects the explanation either by destroying it or by diminishing its explanatory power, i.e. an important part (one that if removed affects the explanation) is an explanatorily relevant part. This can be very useful in many ontological debates. My aim in this paper is twofold. First of all, I will try to assess how this view on explanatory relevance can affect the recent ontological debate in the philosophy of mathematics—as I will argue, contrary to how it may appear at first glance, it does not help very much the mathematical realists. Second of all, I will show that there are big problems with it.