摘要：In this paper we ask whether the two-factor theory of delusions is
compatible with two claims, that delusions are pathological and that
delusions are adaptive. We concentrate on two recent and influential
models of the two-factor theory: the one proposed by Max Coltheart,
Peter Menzies and John Sutton (2010) and the one developed by Ryan
McKay (2012). The models converge on the nature of Factor 1 but
diverge about the nature of Factor 2. The differences between the two
models are reflected in different accounts of the pathological and
adaptive nature of delusions. We will explore such differences,
considering naturalist and normativist accounts of the pathological
and focusing on judgements of adaptiveness that are informed by the
shear-pin hypothesis (McKay and Dennett 2009). After reaching our
conclusions about the two models, we draw more general
implications for the status of delusions within two-factor theories. Are
there good grounds to claim that delusions are pathological? Are
delusions ever adaptive? Can delusions be at the same time
pathological and adaptive.
