Children approach counterfactual questions about stories with a reasoning strategy that falls short of adults’ Counterfactual Reasoning (CFR). It was dubbed “Basic Conditional Reasoning” (BCR) in Rafetseder et al. (Child Dev 81(1):376-389, ). In this paper we provide a characterisation of the differences between BCR and CFR using a distinction between permanent and nonpermanent features of stories and Lewis/Stalnaker counterfactual logic. The critical difference pertains to how consistency between a story and a conditional antecedent incompatible with a nonpermanent feature of the story is achieved. Basic conditional reasoners simply drop all nonpermanent features of the story. Counterfactual reasoners preserve as much of the story as possible while accommodating the antecedent.
展开▼
机译：孩子们用一种比成人的反事实推理（CFR）少的推理策略来处理有关故事的反事实问题。在Rafetseder等人的文章中，它被称为“基本条件推理”（BCR）。 （Child Dev 81（1）：376-389，）。在本文中，我们使用故事的永久性和非永久性特征与Lewis / Stalnaker反事实逻辑之间的区别来描述BCR和CFR之间的差异。关键差异涉及如何实现故事和与故事的非永久性特征不兼容的条件先决条件之间的一致性。基本的条件推理者只是简单地放弃了故事的所有非永久性特征。反事实推理者在适应前例的同时，尽可能保留了故事的全部内容。
展开▼
