首页 > 最新文献

Cogency最新文献

英文 中文
Analogías a priori y aplicación de conceptos 先验类比和概念应用
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI: 10.32995/cogency.v13i1.367
Fabián Bernache Maldonado
¿Constituyen las analogías a priori un tipo de argumento distinto de los argumentos deductivos? Mi objetivo en este artículo es abordar esta larga polémica. Basándome en una tesis general acerca de la relación entre nuestra capacidad de aplicar conceptos y nuestra capacidad intuitiva de argumentar lógicamente, sostengo que los principios de fundamentación racional que empleamos en las analogías a priori son esencialmente los mismos que los que empleamos en la argumentación deductiva. Por consiguiente, al menos desde un punto de vista lógico, no hay razón para admitir que las analogías a priori constituyan un tipo distinto de argumento. No por ello debemos suponer, sin embargo, que el uso de analogías a priori es prescindible.
先验类比是否构成一种不同于演绎论证的论证类型?我在本文中的目的是解决这个长期存在的争议。基于一个关于我们应用概念的能力和我们逻辑论证的直觉能力之间关系的一般论点,我认为我们在先验类比中使用的理性基础原则本质上与我们在演绎论证中使用的原则相同。因此,至少从逻辑上讲,没有理由承认先验类比构成了一种不同类型的论证。然而,这并不意味着我们可以假定使用先验类比是多余的。
{"title":"Analogías a priori y aplicación de conceptos","authors":"Fabián Bernache Maldonado","doi":"10.32995/cogency.v13i1.367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/cogency.v13i1.367","url":null,"abstract":"¿Constituyen las analogías a priori un tipo de argumento distinto de los argumentos deductivos? Mi objetivo en este artículo es abordar esta larga polémica. Basándome en una tesis general acerca de la relación entre nuestra capacidad de aplicar conceptos y nuestra capacidad intuitiva de argumentar lógicamente, sostengo que los principios de fundamentación racional que empleamos en las analogías a priori son esencialmente los mismos que los que empleamos en la argumentación deductiva. Por consiguiente, al menos desde un punto de vista lógico, no hay razón para admitir que las analogías a priori constituyan un tipo distinto de argumento. No por ello debemos suponer, sin embargo, que el uso de analogías a priori es prescindible.","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90972256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Design of a teacher training program for the development of pedagogical knowledge on argumentation content 设计一个教师培训计划,发展教学知识的论证内容
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2020-12-30 DOI: 10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.365
Gabriel Fortes, Antonia Larrain, Marisol Gómez
{"title":"Design of a teacher training program for the development of pedagogical knowledge on argumentation content","authors":"Gabriel Fortes, Antonia Larrain, Marisol Gómez","doi":"10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.365","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79330628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Theory of reasoning by goals 目标推理理论
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2020-12-30 DOI: 10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.364
Nicola D'Alfonso
The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibility of introducing a new theoretical model of deductive reasoning into the psychology of reasoning. This new theoretical model, which we will call here the theory of reasoning by goals, has as its main property to make every characteristic of deductive reasoning depend on the goal employed by an agent to be able to reason. The theoretical context within which this goal must be framed is therefore that of the agency, here understood in a generic way as the ability that each individual has, in his or her role as agent, to pursue his or her own ends through the achievement of specific goals.
本文的目的是探讨在推理心理学中引入一种新的演绎推理理论模型的可能性。这个新的理论模型,我们在这里将其称为目标推理理论,其主要属性是使演绎推理的每一个特征都依赖于一个主体能够进行推理所采用的目标。因此,制定这一目标的理论背景必须是代理的理论背景,在这里,代理一般被理解为每个个体在其作为代理的角色中,通过实现特定目标来追求其自身目的的能力。
{"title":"Theory of reasoning by goals","authors":"Nicola D'Alfonso","doi":"10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.364","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibility of introducing a new theoretical model of deductive reasoning into the psychology of reasoning. This new theoretical model, which we will call here the theory of reasoning by goals, has as its main property to make every characteristic of deductive reasoning depend on the goal employed by an agent to be able to reason. The theoretical context within which this goal must be framed is therefore that of the agency, here understood in a generic way as the ability that each individual has, in his or her role as agent, to pursue his or her own ends through the achievement of specific goals.","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73057281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Metaphor and parallelism in political advertisements 政治广告中的隐喻与类比
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2020-12-29 DOI: 10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.360
Tasnim Lubis, A. Purba
{"title":"Metaphor and parallelism in political advertisements","authors":"Tasnim Lubis, A. Purba","doi":"10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.360","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85231090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16
When is it responsible to generalize from a single instance? 何时负责从单个实例进行泛化?
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2020-12-29 DOI: 10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.359
David Botting
Although large samples are always better than small samples and always confer greater justification on general claims than small samples, this paper argues for situations where even a small sample can justifiably be thought to be representative of the population and we are justified in believing, or having a pro-attitude towards, a general claim by generalizing from it. It is not fallacious to make inductive inferences in these situations from small samples. I will describe three such scenarios. On the other hand, when it cannot justifiably be thought to be representative of the population then it is always fallacious, irrespective of other considerations. I will describe one such scenario in which generalizing from a small sample has been claimed to be justified on the grounds of cognitive economy and will show that this claim is false unless the scenario reduces to one of the first three. Since generalizing from a single instance is a limiting case of generalizing from a small sample, I will focus on generalizing from a single instance. Whatever can be shown with regard to a single instance follows a fortiori for all small samples. As it turns out, it is very difficult for a reasoner reasoning in good conscience to commit to a fallacy of hasty generalization, and if a fallacy can only be committed by insincere reasoners and cannot be made by reasoners reasoning in good conscience, then it is not very interesting, as it is not really an error in reasoning. The reason for this is that for the reasoner to have reasoned fallaciously, they must have knowingly ignored evidence, and this is something that a sincere reasoner is not likely to have done. Equally, the charge that someone has committed this fallacy is not easy to substantiate and amounts to accusing the reasoner of insincerity.
虽然大样本总是比小样本好,并且总是比小样本赋予更大的理由,但本文认为,即使是小样本也可以被合理地认为是代表总体的,我们有理由相信,或者通过概括来支持一般主张。在这些情况下,从小样本中进行归纳推断并不是错误的。我将描述三个这样的场景。另一方面,当它不能被合理地认为是人口的代表,那么它总是错误的,不管其他考虑。我将描述一个这样的场景,在这个场景中,从一个小样本中进行概括被认为是基于认知经济学的,并且将证明这种说法是错误的,除非该场景减少到前三个场景之一。由于从单个实例进行泛化是从小样本进行泛化的一种限制情况,因此我将重点讨论从单个实例进行泛化。对于单个实例可以显示的任何东西,对于所有小样本都遵循一个比率。事实证明,一个理性者凭良心推理很难得出草率概括的谬误,如果一个谬误只能由不真诚的理性者犯,而不能由理性者凭良心推理得出,那么它就不是很有趣,因为它并不是一个真正的推理错误。这样做的原因是,对于推理者来说,推理是错误的,他们必须故意忽视证据,而这是一个真诚的推理者不太可能做的事情。同样,指控某人犯了这个谬论也不容易证实,这等于指责推理者不真诚。
{"title":"When is it responsible to generalize from a single instance?","authors":"David Botting","doi":"10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/COGENCY.V12I2.359","url":null,"abstract":"Although large samples are always better than small samples and always confer greater justification on general claims than small samples, this paper argues for situations where even a small sample can justifiably be thought to be representative of the population and we are justified in believing, or having a pro-attitude towards, a general claim by generalizing from it. It is not fallacious to make inductive inferences in these situations from small samples. I will describe three such scenarios. On the other hand, when it cannot justifiably be thought to be representative of the population then it is always fallacious, irrespective of other considerations. I will describe one such scenario in which generalizing from a small sample has been claimed to be justified on the grounds of cognitive economy and will show that this claim is false unless the scenario reduces to one of the first three. Since generalizing from a single instance is a limiting case of generalizing from a small sample, I will focus on generalizing from a single instance. Whatever can be shown with regard to a single instance follows a fortiori for all small samples. As it turns out, it is very difficult for a reasoner reasoning in good conscience to commit to a fallacy of hasty generalization, and if a fallacy can only be committed by insincere reasoners and cannot be made by reasoners reasoning in good conscience, then it is not very interesting, as it is not really an error in reasoning. The reason for this is that for the reasoner to have reasoned fallaciously, they must have knowingly ignored evidence, and this is something that a sincere reasoner is not likely to have done. Equally, the charge that someone has committed this fallacy is not easy to substantiate and amounts to accusing the reasoner of insincerity.","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85575632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Socio-epistemological challenges of democratic innovation: "The ethics of invention" by Sheila Jasanoff 民主创新的社会认识论挑战:希拉·雅萨诺夫的《发明的伦理》
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI: 10.32995/COGENCY.V11I1-2.330
J. Goñi
{"title":"Socio-epistemological challenges of democratic innovation: \"The ethics of invention\" by Sheila Jasanoff","authors":"J. Goñi","doi":"10.32995/COGENCY.V11I1-2.330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/COGENCY.V11I1-2.330","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73016033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Habilidades de argumentación de estudiantes de educación básica subvencionada en Chile y su relación con variables socio-educativas 智利基础教育资助学生的论证技巧及其与社会教育变量的关系
Q2 Arts and Humanities Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI: 10.32995/cogency.v11i1-2.322
A. Larraín, Vivian Singer
La argumentación escrita es una habilidad relevante para la vida en sociedades complejas. Sin embargo, estas han sido escasamente focalizadas como objetivo pedagógico en el sistema educativo en Chile, y poco sabemos del desempeño en tareas de argumentación en escolares chilenos. Este estudio tiene por objetivo contribuir al conocimiento de las habilidades de escritura argumentativa en estudiantes chilenos y las variables socio-educativas que influyen en su desarrollo. Se evaluó una muestra de 674 estudiantes de cuarto año básico de 26 establecimientos subvencionados de la Región Metropolitana, Chile. Se realizó una regresión multinivel donde el nivel intersujeto corresponde a la edad y sexo de los estudiantes, y el nivel intrasujeto corresponde a las características del colegio, tipo de dependencia, índice de vulnerabilidad del colegio y los Puntajes SIMCE en lenguaje y matemáticas. Los hallazgos de este estudio dan cuenta de que el sexo, la dependencia del colegio y los puntajes SIMCE en lenguaje predicen de forma significativa
书面辩论是复杂社会生活中的一项相关技能。然而,在智利的教育系统中,辩论作为一种教学目标的重点很少,我们对智利学生在辩论任务中的表现也很少了解。本研究旨在提高智利学生议论文写作技能的知识,以及影响其发展的社会教育变量。本研究的目的是评估智利首都地区26所资助机构的674名基础四年级学生的样本。采用多层次回归方法,主体间水平对应学生的年龄和性别,主体内水平对应学校特征、依赖类型、学校脆弱性指数和SIMCE语言和数学得分。这项研究的结果表明,性别、学校依赖性和SIMCE语言得分显著预测了语言的发展
{"title":"Habilidades de argumentación de estudiantes de educación básica subvencionada en Chile y su relación con variables socio-educativas","authors":"A. Larraín, Vivian Singer","doi":"10.32995/cogency.v11i1-2.322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32995/cogency.v11i1-2.322","url":null,"abstract":"La argumentación escrita es una habilidad relevante para la vida en sociedades complejas. Sin embargo, estas han sido escasamente focalizadas como objetivo pedagógico en el sistema educativo en Chile, y poco sabemos del desempeño en tareas de argumentación en escolares chilenos. Este estudio tiene por objetivo contribuir al conocimiento de las habilidades de escritura argumentativa en estudiantes chilenos y las variables socio-educativas que influyen en su desarrollo. Se evaluó una muestra de 674 estudiantes de cuarto año básico de 26 establecimientos subvencionados de la Región Metropolitana, Chile. Se realizó una regresión multinivel donde el nivel intersujeto corresponde a la edad y sexo de los estudiantes, y el nivel intrasujeto corresponde a las características del colegio, tipo de dependencia, índice de vulnerabilidad del colegio y los Puntajes SIMCE en lenguaje y matemáticas. Los hallazgos de este estudio dan cuenta de que el sexo, la dependencia del colegio y los puntajes SIMCE en lenguaje predicen de forma significativa","PeriodicalId":37515,"journal":{"name":"Cogency","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72697308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
期刊
Cogency
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1