Scholarlink

<p>Shiffrin, Stigler, and Keil worry that science frequently falls victim to an illusion of understanding. We take their argument a step further, arguing that psychological scientists often fundamentally mischaracterize human understanding as rooted in internally represented <i>theories</i> of any kind. We propose an alternative, interactive notion of understanding.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Is the “Theory-theory” of Understanding a Mistake? An Interactive Perspective on Knowledge and Explanation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月24日

查看全文
  • Simon Myers,
  • Nick Chater

摘要

Shiffrin, Stigler, and Keil worry that science frequently falls victim to an illusion of understanding. We take their argument a step further, arguing that psychological scientists often fundamentally mischaracterize human understanding as rooted in internally represented theories of any kind. We propose an alternative, interactive notion of understanding.