Revisiting Maher’s One-Factor Theory of Delusion, Again

TY - JOUR

T1 - Revisiting Maher’s One-Factor Theory of Delusion, Again

AU - Sullivan-Bissett, Ema

AU - Noordhof, Paul

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.

PY - 2024/4/3

Y1 - 2024/4/3

N2 - Chenwei Nie ([22]) argues against a Maherian one-factor approach to explaining delusion. We argue that his objections fail. They are largely based on a mistaken understanding of the approach (as committed to the claim that anomalous experience is sufficient for delusion). Where they are not so based, they instead rest on misinterpretation of recent defences of the position, and an underestimation of the resources available to the one-factor theory.

AB - Chenwei Nie ([22]) argues against a Maherian one-factor approach to explaining delusion. We argue that his objections fail. They are largely based on a mistaken understanding of the approach (as committed to the claim that anomalous experience is sufficient for delusion). Where they are not so based, they instead rest on misinterpretation of recent defences of the position, and an underestimation of the resources available to the one-factor theory.

KW - anomalous experience

KW - Delusion

KW - one-factor

KW - rationality

KW - two-factor

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85189644865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12152-024-09553-6

DO - 10.1007/s12152-024-09553-6

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85189644865

SN - 1874-5490

VL - 17

JO - Neuroethics

JF - Neuroethics

IS - 1

M1 - 17

ER -