Journal
SYNTHESE
Volume 200, Issue 2, Pages -Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-022-03585-2
Keywords
Reverse inference; Abduction; Cognitive neuroscience; Justification; Discovery
Categories
Funding
- Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research (MIUR) [201743F9YE]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This paper presents a systematic analysis of reverse inference as a form of abductive reasoning in cognitive neuroscience. The role and limitations of both strong and weak reverse inference are discussed, with a particular focus on weak reverse inference as a discovery strategy.
Reverse inference is a crucial inferential strategy used in cognitive neuroscience to derive conclusions about the engagement of cognitive processes from patterns of brain activation. While widely employed in experimental studies, it is now viewed with increasing scepticism within the neuroscience community. One problem with reverse inference is that it is logically invalid, being an instance of abduction in Peirce's sense. In this paper, we offer the first systematic analysis of reverse inference as a form of abductive reasoning and highlight some relevant implications for the current debate. We start by formalising an important distinction that has been entirely neglected in the literature, namely the distinction between weak (strategic) and strong (justificatory) reverse inference. Then, we rely on case studies from recent neuroscientific research to systematically discuss the role and limits of both strong and weak reverse inference; in particular, we offer the first exploration of weak reverse inference as a discovery strategy within cognitive neuroscience.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available