Commentary: Are there good reasons to adopt dynamic systems approaches for explaining deductive reasoning?
The focus of this commentary is twofold. First, I examine Faiciuc's attempts to counter symbolic computationalism as a major theoretical framework for the study of deductive reasoning. Second, I wish to see how far the author goes in her defense of Dynamic Systems Approaches (DSAs) as a more promising framework for explaining logical reasoning. When reading her work, I posed two versions of the same for/against question to myself: How strong is the case against symbolic computationalism? And, on the basis of the author's argumentation, would one feel justified in adopting DSAs instead? I examine each question in turn, and come to similar conclusions. The article by Faiciuc tackles issues of relevance to any serious effort toward reflecting on the two perspectives being compared. Unfortunately, however, references to studies supporting her claims are rather thin. A better-informed answer to the question raised in the title of the article is still to be given.
Leitão
Selma
S
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil. selma_leitao2001@yahoo.com
D003071:Cognition; D006801:Humans; D008128:Logic; D008960:Models, Psychological; D017711:Nonlinear Dynamics; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards; D013561:Symbolism; D013850:Thinking