Reply to Commentators 2 The commentators expressed concerns regarding the relevance and value of non-computational non-symbolic explanations of cognitive performance. But what counts as an " explanation " depends on the pre-theoretical assumptions behind the scenes of empirical science regarding the kinds of variables and relationships that are sought out in the first place, and some of the pre...

Some medical researchers and commentators on tests of medical treatments recognized more than two centuries ago that conclusions about the effects of treatments should be based on adequate numbers of people. From the middle of the 19th century onwards, the importance of the ‘law of large numbers’ became acknowledged increasingly within medical research. In 1840, for example, Jules Gavarret note...

In 1936 Tarski sketched a rigorous definition of the concept of logical consequence which, he claimed, agreed quite well with common usage—or, as he also said, with the common concept of consequence. Commentators of Tarski’s paper have usually been elusive as to what this common concept is. However, being clear on this issue is important to decide whether Tarski’s definition failed (as Etchemen...

In this article, we respond to the four comments on our target article. Some of the commentators suggest that we have formulated our proposals in a way that renders our account of dual-process theory untestable and less interesting than the broad theory that has been critiqued in recent literature. Our response is that there is a confusion of levels. Falsifiable predictions occur not at the lev...

Online communities provide a social sphere for people to share information and knowledge. while information sharing is becoming a ubiquitous online phenomenon, how to ensure information quality or induce quality content remains a challenge because of the anonymity of commentators. this paper introduces moderation into reputation systems. we show that moderation directly affects strategic commen...

TO THE EDITOR: We thank the commentators (3) for taking the time to prepare their excellent submissions. We believe that the premise of the Point:Counterpoint concept is that protagonists adopt adversarial positions in order that the process of debate might stimulate some new insight or ideas. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde “A debate that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called a debate at all....