Adaptive diversity and misbelief

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (6):516 (2009)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Although it makes some progress, McKay & Dennett's (M&D's) proposal is limited because (1) the argument for adaptive misbelief is not new, (2) arguments overextend the evidence provided, and (3) the alleged sufficient conditions are not as prohibitive as suggested. We offer alternative perspectives and evidence, including individual differences research, indicating that adaptive misbeliefs are likely much more widespread than implied.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
COKADA-3
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-12-29
View other versions
Added to PP index
2012-08-31

Total views
334 ( #22,652 of 69,040 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #56,059 of 69,040 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.