Cokely,E.T.

Reviews the book, In two minds: Dual processes and beyond edited by Jonathan St. B. T. Evans and Keith Frankish (see record 2009-05881-000). This book brings together scholars from a variety of disciplines to discuss both specific and generic dual process theories. It details the many ways in which the history of science and of Western thought has characterized the mind as partitioned, providing greatly needed historical and philosophical perspectives. The book goes on to emphasize modern dual and multiprocess research programs that have emerged over the last 30 years. Broadly, In Two Minds has three aims: 1) to clarify theoretical positions, review technical terms and attempt to refine notions of a generic dual systems theory; 2) to increase the exchange among scholars, many of whom have independently developed specific dual or multiprocess theories; and 3) to encourage the use and development of dual process theories and their applications. According to the reviewer, in some regards this book achieves its goals, but in others it falls short. The reviewer then highlights the limitations of the overarching framework of this book and then describes the components of a "good theory." Overall, this book makes progress, as in its attempts to provide interdisciplinary and historical perspectives. However, it is very clear that if we are to make meaningful scientific progress, we must move beyond vague and inconsistent notions of generic dual processes.

Cokely, E. T. (2009). Beyond generic dual processes: How should we evaluate scientific progress? [Review of the book In two minds: Dual processes and beyond, by J. St. B. T. Evans and K. Frankish]. PsycCritiques, 54(51), 6 p. doi:10.1037/a0017643 (Full text)

Publication year	2009
Document type:	Article
Publication status:	Published
External URL:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017643 View
Categories:
Keywords: