The problem-ladenness of theory

Abstract

The cognitive sciences are facing questions of how to select from competing theories or develop those that suit their current needs. However, traditional accounts of theoretical virtues have not yet proven informative to theory development in these fields. We advance a pragmatic account by which theoretical virtues are heuristics we use to estimate a theory’s contribution to a field’s body of knowledge, and the degree to which it increases that knowledge’s ability to solve problems in the field’s domain, or problem-space. From this perspective, properties that are traditionally considered epistemic virtues, such as a theory’s fit to data or internal coherence, can be couched in terms of problem-space coverage, and additional virtues come to light that reflect a theory’s alignment with problem-having agents and context in a societally-embedded scientific system. This approach helps us understand why the needs of different fields result in different kinds of theories, and allows us to formulate the challenges facing cognitive science in terms that we hope will facilitate their resolution through further theoretical development.

Authors 7

1. Daniel Levenstein corresponding

   Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital · Mila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute · McGill University

   Affiliation as printed

   . Mila , Montreal , QC . Canada

   . Montreal Neurological Institute . McGill University . Monreal , QC . Canada

   . Mila, Montreal, QC. Canada

   . Montreal Neurological Institute. McGill University. Monreal, QC. Canada

2. Aniello De Santo

   University of Utah

   Affiliation as printed

   . Department of Linguistics , University of Utah , Salt Lake City , UT , USA

   . Department of Linguistics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

3. Saskia Heijnen Aachen Cognitive Psychology Unit Institute of Psychology, Leiden University

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   . Cognitive Psychology Unit , Institute of Psychology , Leiden University , Leiden , The Netherlands

   . Cognitive Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

4. Manjari Narayan
   Affiliation as printed

   . Unaffiliated / Independent Researcher

5. Freek Oude Maatman

   Radboud University Nijmegen · University of Groningen

   Affiliation as printed

   . Department of Philosophy of Behavioural Science , Faculty of Social Science , Radboud University

   . Department of Theoretical Philosophy , Faculty of Philosophy , University of Groningen

   . Department of Philosophy of Behavioural Science, Faculty of Social Science, Radboud University

   . Department of Theoretical Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Groningen

6. Jonathan Rawski

   San Jose State University

   Affiliation as printed

   . Department of Linguistics & Language Development , San Jose State University

   . Department of Linguistics & Language Development, San Jose State University

7. Cory Wright

   California State University, Long Beach

   Affiliation as printed

   . Department of Philosophy , California State University Long Beach , Long Beach , CA , USA

   . Department of Philosophy, California State University Long Beach, Long Beach, CA, USA