Nie, Chenwei (2019) Continuing commentary: challenges or misunderstandings? A defence of the two-factor theory against the challenges to its logic. [Preprint]

Preview

Text NIECC-2v3.pdf Download (303kB) | Preview

Abstract

Corlett (2019) raises two groups of challenges against the two-factor theory of delusions: One focuses on weighing “the evidence for … the two-factor theory”; the other aims to question “the logic of the two-factor theory” (p. 166). McKay (2019) has robustly defended the two-factor theory against the first group. But the second group, which Corlett believes is in many aspects independent of the first group and Darby (2019, p. 180) takes as “[t]he most important challenge to the two-factor theory raised by Dr. Corlett”, has by large remained. Here I offer my two cents in response to the second group. More specifically, I argue that Corlett’s challenges to the logic of the two-factor theory, concerning modularity, double dissociation and cognitive penetration, seem to be based on some misunderstandings of the two-factor theory.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Nie, Chenwei
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Medicine > Psychiatry
Depositing User:	Chenwei Nie
Date Deposited:	22 Jun 2023 13:37
Last Modified:	22 Jun 2023 13:37
Item ID:	22230
Journal or Publication Title:	Cognitive Neuropsychiatry
Official URL:	http://doi.org/10.1080/13546805.2019.1652156
DOI or Unique Handle:	10.1080/13546805.2019.1652156
Subjects:	Specific Sciences > Medicine > Psychiatry
Date:	2019
Page Range:	pp. 300-307
Volume:	24
Number:	4
ISSN:	1354-6805
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/22230

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Altmetric.com

Actions (login required)

View Item