From 4879719deaa560d01c6658161b411fca1697985b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Simple_Not <44047940+moonbaseDelta@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 23:30:26 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] 1.3 eng

---
 book/src/part1/chapter1/1.3.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/book/src/part1/chapter1/1.3.md b/book/src/part1/chapter1/1.3.md
index 02d33f4..025b639 100644
--- a/book/src/part1/chapter1/1.3.md
+++ b/book/src/part1/chapter1/1.3.md
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ boiled down to four claims:
 
 Given these premises, Churchland cites three basic regards in which FP
 has shown itself to be profoundly unsatisfactory:
-1. There are a significant number of phenomena for which FP isnincapable of providing either a coherent explanation or successful prediction: e.g., the range of cognitive fractionation engendered by brain damage, the precise aetiology and typology of mental illness, the specific cognitive mechanisms involved in scientific discovery and artistic creativity.
+1. There are a significant number of phenomena for which FP is incapable of providing either a coherent explanation or successful prediction: e.g., the range of cognitive fractionation engendered by brain damage, the precise aetiology and typology of mental illness, the specific cognitive mechanisms involved in scientific discovery and artistic creativity.
 2. FP is theoretically stagnant, it has conspicuously failed to develop in step with the rapidly accelerating rate of cultural evolution or evolve in accordance with the novel cognitive requirements imposed by advanced technological societies.
 3. FP is increasingly isolated and anomalous with regard to the corpus of the natural sciences; specifically, it is conceptually irreducible to the emerging discourse of cognitive neuroscience