based on fold-psychology
collectivist (apply to a collection of things share similar property, holist)
Folk psychology: not necessarily pejorative, accumulation of models from daily life.
Property of FIC descriptions:
common in media, pop media
ambiguous when talking about a group
not obvious, generating conclusion needs special knowledge
can be insightful
syllogism: statistical syllogism: syllogism with probability
Group Believes: does it exists?
dictatorship: can coordinate movements to achieve goal (desire -> action)
collectively controlled group: working individually for group's good
interpretivism: the task is to uncover hidden believes
they does not reside on empirical evidence (how can you tell if internal believe is true)
claims are ambiguous
minimalist theories of mind: a way to ascribe mental state to people
focus on behavior output
assume minds are rational
inference to the best explanation (abductive reasoning): a strategy for identifying the right explanation for some set of phenomena by picking the most likely or plausible one from among a range of possible explanations
its like 1. I collect a dataset of actions
why do you assume these actions come from the same belives
The author reject this minimalist theories of mind by saying that there exists many possible believes for one action, but I think the author's reasoning is not able to deny the methodology
Yes, there are "methods to evaluate an interpretation" But your method doesn't say which one is the best if all my interpretations come form these strategies
Yes. "composite construction": using existing theory (not just black box input and output) built from earlier research
I think interpretive social psychologists can ascribe (or, using the phrase of the question, "access") people's hidden beliefs and desires more accurately than a folk psychologist because of a difference in their research methodology. Folk psychology, defined in the paper, uses theories and models generated from daily life activities to deduct the internal states (hidden beliefs and desires) of people (page 1). The author also states that both folk psychologists and well-trained interpretivists use "a combination of environmental and behavioral strategies" to ascribe internal states (page 7). However, since I think interpretive social scientists tend to have more access to "composite-construction" (page 11) than folk psychologists, and that applying the "composite construction strategy" can greatly reduce the number of possible mental states associated with an action in the problem of "inference to the best explanation", interpretive social scientists can more accurately ascribe one's internal state than a folk psychologist due to their methodological difference in research.
Not compelling. He should not argue in this way.
The author reject this minimalist theories of mind by saying that there exists many possible believes for one action, but I think the author's reasoning is not able to deny the methodology.
which specific "under-determination"
article by political scientist Lenka Bustikova Bustikova's argument is entirely based on what Bustikova thinks a group of voter believes. This is Bustikova's assumption, or at least Bustikova did not justify this with empirical evidence.
Table of Content