A few points:
(1) I think that there is a conceptual confusion of using the
terms "to effect" as a substitute for "related to", the latter
can be either causal or correlational or both.
(2) One could argue that the fundamental goal of science
is to identify and define causal relationships
Thanks for the ideas. Ours is a MS-only program and for almost all of them
this will be their only grad-level cognitive course, some their first
introduction to the topic. I'll check out your #1 suggestions. I'm sure
I'll want a book for them. The article repositories could be handy. My
first
APS has challenged members and others to read "Degrees of Maybe: How We
Can All Make Better Predictions" on NPR and then to leave a comment. This
challenge can be found at:
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/degrees-of-maybe-how-we-can-all-make-better-predictions.html
The story is at:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 07:50:44 -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
Anyone have suggestions for a graduate level cognition textbook?
I think one would first have to answer a couple of questions:
(1) Is the textbook being in a course that is open to master's
students and graduate students in
I'll tell ya, I don't see it happening.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Christopher Green wrote:
>
> Perhaps (he said wearily), we should end the long-futile effort to enforce
> conceptual distinctions by legislating the use of mere words and, instead,
> educate people
Perhaps (he said wearily), we should end the long-futile effort to enforce
conceptual distinctions by legislating the use of mere words and, instead,
educate people rigorously enough that they are capable and, indeed, desirous,
of respecting and expressing important conceptual distinctions in