Continuing commentary : challenges or misunderstandings? A defence of the two-factor theory against the challenges to its logic

Cognitive Neuropsychiatry 24 (4):300-307 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Corlett (2019) raises two groups of challenges against the two-factor theory of delusions: One focuses on weighing “the evidence for … the two-factor theory”; the other aims to question “the logic of the two-factor theory” (p. 166). McKay (2019) has robustly defended the two-factor theory against the first group. But the second group, which Corlett believes is in many aspects independent of the first group and Darby (2019, p. 180) takes as “[t]he most important challenge to the two-factor theory raised by Dr. Corlett”, has by large remained. Here I offer my two cents in response to the second group. More specifically, I argue that Corlett’s challenges to the logic of the two-factor theory, concerning modularity, double dissociation and cognitive penetration, seem to be based on some misunderstandings of the two-factor theory.
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2021-01-25
Latest version: 3 (2022-01-17)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
62 ( #54,952 of 65,552 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #36,497 of 65,552 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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