Abstract
The notion of folk-psychology as a primitive speculative theory of the mental is called into question. There is cause to believe that folk-psychology has more in common with a naive physics than with early speculative physical theorising. The distinction between these is elaborated. The conclusion drawn is that commonsense ascription of psychological content, though not a suitable finishing point for cognitive science, should still provide a more reliable source of data than some contemporary theorists are willing to admit.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 139-154 |
Number of pages | 16 |
Journal | Cognitive Science |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1987 |
Externally published | Yes |