Cohen and Philosophy
In the field of psychology, psychologists have long strived for completely objective experiments on humans. The objectivity and the precision of the outcome are mandatory for scientifically acceptable results. In an article entitled "Analysis and Rationality" by L. Jonathan Cohen, the author states that experiments on humans cannot demonstrate the absence or presence of a human intuition that generates a set of correct logical principles. Cohen states that the sentences stated within the experiment do not convey everything in the exchange, as humans apply contextual circumstances to communication with the experimenter. He adds that an experimenter needs to explain the differences between what is stated and what is implied, thereby making the subject no longer a layman. Furthermore, Cohen states that humans have a different understanding of the connective terms like "or" and "if" on an individual level which inhibit their performance on these psychological experiments. These claims combine to a less than substantial argument against the field of experimental psychology. Cohen states that the act of communication is much more than a combination of sentences. A human conversation is regulated by its relevance, brevity, inf
If we consider the message's content in its entirety, Cohen proposes that it is not fallacious for a subject to presume that the converse is implied in the message, provided that there is no statement to the contrary (72). If an experimenter is attempting to eliminate such an assumption, Cohen states that subject instruction is imperative. However if the subject still commits the fallacy in question, it may simply be an indication of the experimenter's failure to articulate correct instruction. On a side note, in this argument Cohen uses the phrase "supposed fallacy" repeatedly to emphasize his disdain for the experimenters' explanation for human deductive failure. Cohen states that without instruction differentiating between implication and stated information, a subject can and will commit a fallacy based on implied information. However, with instruction, the subject is no longer untutored and is considered a student of the logical sciences. As a student of the logical sciences, this person can no longer be considered useful as a subject. I disagree with Cohen on this point. It may not be fallacious for the aforementioned presumption to take place, but it is also not necessarily logical. To use a Cohen example, "All crows are black" is a message to which a subject would not presume that the converse is implied. The subject would not reason that all black things are crows. Instruction may eliminate the presumption, but was it there in the first place? I thought experiments were to determine if such a presumption is inherent in human reasoning. Cohen argues that psychological experim
Some common words found in the essay are:
E105 Subjects, Furthermore Cohen, Jonathan Cohen, , psychological experiments, logical errors, subject brings own, student logical sciences, presume converse implied, subject presume converse, reasonable claim experiments, reasons logical, supposed fallacy, experiments value, human intuition, experiment hand, deductive choices, claim experiments, reasonable claim,
Approximate Word count = 1085
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
