Abstract
AbstractI support Rips et al.'s critique of psychology through (1) a complementary argument about the normative, modal, constitutive nature of mathematical principles. I add two reservations about their analysis of mathematical induction, arguing (2) for constructivism against their logicism as to its interpretation and formation in childhood (Smith 2002), and (3) for Piaget's account of reasons in rule learning.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Behavioral Neuroscience,Physiology,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Reference15 articles.
1. Leibniz: New Essays on Human Understanding
2. Wittgenstein's rule-following paradox: How to resolve it with lessons for psychology;Smith;New Ideas in Psychology