Mistakes in Thinking about Cognitive Science and How to Reduce Them.

This article allows readers to assess their ability to detect errors in thinking in seven case histories of psychologists' thoughts about cognitive science. It explains the nature of the errors and shows that some of them reflect faulty reasoning. It presents a "model method" to improve reasoning.

Reasoning From Quantified Modal Premises.

Quantified modal inferences interest logicians, linguists, and computer scientists, but no previous psychological study of them appears to be in the literature. Here is an example of one: All those artists are businessmen. Paulo is possibly one of the artists.

Reasoning about possibilities: Modal logics, possible worlds, and mental models.

Everyone reasons about possibilities. This article explains how they could do so using mental models. The theory makes four major claims: 1.

Human verifications: Computable with truth values outside logic.

Cognitive scientists treat verification as a computation in which descriptions that match the relevant situation are true, but otherwise false. The claim is controversial: The logician Gödel and the physicist Penrose have argued that human verifications are not computable. In contrast, the theory of mental models treats verification as computable, but the two truth values of standard logics, and , as insufficient.

How poetry evokes emotions.

Poetry evokes emotions. It does so, according to the theory we present, from three sorts of simulation. They each can prompt emotions, which are communications both within the brain and among people.