Folk psychology and network theory: Fact or gamble? A reply to Kalis and Borsboom

1Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Kalis and Borsboom (2020) defend their realism about folk psychology against my challenge to provide a grounding argument for the correctness of folk psychological explanation (Oude Maatman, 2020). In this reply, I show how their clarified realism in fact vindicates this challenge, as it heavily relies on the predictive success of folk psychology. I then proceed by describing how their realist interpretation of “intentional content” complicates the usability of network theory, and show that both their antireductionism and realism are grounded in an empirical gamble against alternatives. I end with a brief defense of my own version of network theory.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Oude Maatman, F. (2020). Folk psychology and network theory: Fact or gamble? A reply to Kalis and Borsboom. Theory and Psychology, 30(5), 729–734. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354320952863

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free