When does ‘Folk Psychology’ Count as Folk Psychological?

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
It has commonly been argued that certain types of mental descriptions, specifically those characterized in terms of propositional attitudes, are part of a folk psychological understanding of the mind. Recently, however, it has also been argued that this is the case even when such descriptions are employed as part of scientific theories in domains like social psychology and comparative psychology. In this paper, I argue that there is no plausible way to understand the distinction between folk and scientific psychology that can support such claims. Moreover, these sorts of claims can have adverse consequences for the neuroscientific study of the brain by downplaying the value of many psychological theories that provide information neuroscientists need in order to build and test neurological models
Reprint years
2016, 2017
PhilPapers/Archive ID
HOCWDQ
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-08-16
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-08-16

Total downloads
270 ( #9,571 of 37,125 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
48 ( #7,309 of 37,125 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.