Logical reasoning and domain specificity - A critique of the social exchange theory of reasoning

23Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The social exchange theory of reasoning, which is championed by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, falls under the general rubric "evolutionary psychology" and asserts that human reasoning is governed by content-dependent, domain-specific, evolutionarily-derived algorithms. According to Cosmides and Tooby, the presumptive existence of what they call "cheater-detection" algorithms disconfirms the claim that we reason via general-purpose mechanisms or via inductively acquired principles. We contend that the Cosmides/Tooby arguments in favor of domain-specific algorithms or evolutionarily-derived mechanisms fail and that the notion of a social exchange rule, which is central to their theory, is not correctly characterized. As a consequence, whether or not their conclusion is true cannot be established on the basis of the arguments they have presented. © 1995 Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Davies, P. S., Fetzer, J. H., & Foster, T. R. (1995). Logical reasoning and domain specificity - A critique of the social exchange theory of reasoning. Biology and Philosophy, 10(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00851985

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