The questionable utility of "cognitive ability" in explaining cognitive illusions

ie notion of "cognitive ability" leads to paradoxical conclusions when invo ked to explain Infielder and Piaget's research on class inclusion reasoning and research on the inclusion rule in the heuristics-and-biases program. T he vague distinction between associative and rule-based reasoning overlooks the human capacity for semantic and pragmatic inferences, and consequently , makes intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors.