Triangulation, intervening variables, and experience projection

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):132-133 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I focus on the logic of the goggles experiment, which if it as watertight as Heyes argues, should clearly support ape theory of mind if positive, and clearly reject it if negative. This is not the case, since the experiment tests for only one kind of mindreading, “experience projection”: but it is an excellent test for this, given adequate controls.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,518

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Tactics in theory of mind research.Jesse E. Purdy & Michael Domjan - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):129-130.
What can we learn from the absence of evidence?Thomas R. Zentall - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):133-134.
Precursors to theories of mind in nonhuman brains.Stephen F. Walker - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):131-132.
The Upside‐Down Goggles.Martin Cohen - 2010 - In Mind Games: 31 Days to Rediscover Your Brain. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 29–32.
The Experience Machine Deconstructed.H. E. Baber - 2008 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 15 (1):133-138.
What can we say about the inner experience of the young child?Charles Fernyhough - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (2):143-144.
Primate theory of mind is a Turing test.Robert W. Mitchell & James R. Anderson - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):127-128.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
36 (#636,380)

6 months
13 (#276,161)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references