Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T20:23:34.354Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Should mentalistic concepts be defended or assumed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

E. W. Menzel Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794
Garcia K. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Campbell, D. T. Evolutionary epistemology. In Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), The philosophy of Karl Popper, pp. 413463. LaSalle, Ill.: Open Court Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. and Krebs, J. R. Animal signals: Information or manipulation? In press, 1978.Google Scholar
Lorenz, K. Z.Behind the mirror. London: Methuen, 1977.Google Scholar
Menzel, E. W. Implications of chimpanzee language-training experiments for primate field research - and vice versa. In Chivers, D. J., and Herbert, J. (eds.), Recent advances in primatology: 1. Behavior, pp. 883896. London: Academic Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R.Objective knowledge. Oxford Univ. Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Rosch, E.Cognitive representations of semantic categories, journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104:192233, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turing, A. M.Can a machine think? Mind 59:433458, 1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. C.Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1966.Google Scholar