Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-zzw9c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T19:31:31.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Heroes of our own story: Self-image and rationalizing in thought experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

Tomer David Ullman Open the ORCID record for Tomer David Ullman [Opens in a new window]
Tomer David Ullman*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138. tullman@fas.harvard.eduwww.tomerullman.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cushman's rationalization account can be extended to cover another part of his portrayal of representational exchange: thought experiments that lead to conclusions about the self. While Cushman's argument is compelling, a full account of rationalization as adaptive will need to account for the divergence in rationalizing one's actions compared to the actions of others.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e51
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Auer, P., Cesa-Bianchi, N. & Fischer, P. (2002) Finite-time analysis of the multiarmed bandit problem. Machine Learning 47(2–3):235–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, C. L., Jara-Ettinger, J., Saxe, R. & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2017) Rational quantitative attribution of beliefs, desires and percepts in human mentalizing. Nature Human Behaviour 1(4):1–10. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, C. L., Saxe, R. & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009) Action understanding as inverse planning. Cognition 113(3):329–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clement, J. J. (2009) The role of imagistic simulation in scientific thought experiments. Topics in Cognitive Science 1(4):686–710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. (1994) Minds, bodies, and persons: Young children's understanding of the self and others as reflected in imitation and theory of mind research. In: Self-awareness in animals and humans: Developmental perspectives, eds. Parker, S. T., Mitchell, R. W. & Boccia, M. L., pp. 166–86. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lombrozo, T. (2017) “Learning by thinking” in science and everyday life. In: The scientific imagination. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mach, E. (1897/1976) On thought experiments. In: Knowledge and error (6th ed.), by Mach, E., trans. McCormack, T. & Foulkes, P., pp. 134–47. D. Reidel. (Original work published in 1897)Google Scholar
McCoy, J., Paul, L. & Ullman, T. (2019) Modal prospection. In: Metaphysics and cognitive science, ed. Goldman, A. I. & McLaughlin, B. P., pp. 235–67. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxe, R. (2009) The happiness of the fish: Evidence for a common theory of one's own and others' actions. In: The handbook of imagination and mental simulation, ed. Markman, K. D., Klein, W. M. P. & Suhr, J. A., pp. 257–66. Psychology Press.Google Scholar