Those who interpret the two-dimensional framework on the model of Kaplan's theory recognize that they are extending his theory.
It is also quite clear that, but for these doubts, the upholders of the coherence theory and of the theory of pragmatic usefulness would really have nothing to argue against.
My theory is briefly this. I look upon logic as the theory of deduction or of derivability, or whatever one chooses to call it.
I have explored on other occasions the various dimensions of perception theory and action theory from the standpoint of a relaxed behaviorism.
But it is well invented; and it illustrates the weakness of the projection theory of language, especially as a theory of the correspondence between a statement and a fact.
The second theory is the so-called coherence theory: a statement is regarded as true if (and only if) it coheres with the rest of our knowledge.
It is useful to view this extended theory of conceptual episodes as a placeholder for the future achievements of a neurophysiological theory of representation.
Its primary structure is essentially that of the classical theory, though it is self-consciously formulated as a theory, not a report of Cartesian givens.
The theory of the engram, or any similar theory, has to maintain that, given a body and brain in a suitable state, a man will have a certain memory, without the need of any further conditions.
The theory of generative grammar, both particular and universal, points to a conceptual lacuna in psychological theory that I believe is worth mentioning.