Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T15:15:59.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Précis of Doing without Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2010

Edouard Machery
Edouard Machery
Affiliation:
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, 1017CL, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260. [email protected]/~machery/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although cognitive scientists have learned a lot about concepts, their findings have yet to be organized in a coherent theoretical framework. In addition, after twenty years of controversy, there is little sign that philosophers and psychologists are converging toward an agreement about the very nature of concepts. Doing without Concepts (Machery 2009) attempts to remedy this state of affairs. In this article, I review the main points and arguments developed at greater length in Doing without Concepts.

Keywords

categorizationconceptconcept combinationdual-processeliminativismexemplarinductionmeaningnatural kindsprototypereferencetheory
Type
Target Article
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 33 , Issue 2-3 , June 2010 , pp. 195 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, S. W. & Brooks, L. R. (1991) Specializing the operation of an explicit rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 120:3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1978) Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery. Psychological Review 85:249–77.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. & Betz, J. (2001) A hybrid model of categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8:629–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashby, F. G. & Ell, S. W. (2002) Single versus multiple systems of learning and memory. In: Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology, vol.4: Methodology in experimental psychology, 3rd ed., ed. Wixted, J. & Pashler, H., pp. 655–92. Wiley.Google Scholar
Ashby, F. G. & Maddox, W. T. (2004) Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology 56:149–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1982) Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Memory and Cognition 10:82–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W. (1985) Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11:629–54.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1987) The instability of graded structures: Implications for the nature of concepts. In: Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization, ed. Neisser, U., (pp. 101–38). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1993) Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In: Theories of memory, ed. Collins, A. C., Gathercole, S. E. & Conway, M. A., pp. 29–101. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(4):577–660.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (2008a) Cognitive and neural contributions to understanding the conceptual system. Current Directions in Psychological Science 17:91–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (2008b) Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59:617–45.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. (2009) Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences 364:1281–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K. & Wilson, C. D. (2003) Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7:84–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, P. (1996) Intention, history, and artifact concepts. Cognition 60:1–29.Google Scholar
Boulenger, V., Hauk, O. & Pulvermüller, F. (2009) Grasping ideas with the motor system: Semantic somatotopy in idiom comprehension. Cerebral Cortex 19:1905–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyd, R. (1991) Realism, anti-foundationalism and the enthusiasm for natural kinds. Philosophical Studies 61:127–48.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. (1999) Kinds, complexity and multiple realization. Philosophical Studies 95:67–98.Google Scholar
Caramazza, A. (1986) On drawing inferences about the structure of normal cognitive systems from the analysis of patterns of impaired performance: The case for single-patient studies. Brain and Cognition 5:41–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chao, L. L. & Martin, A. (1999) Cortical representation of perception, naming, and knowledge of color. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 11:25–35.Google Scholar
Churchland, P. M. (1981) Eliminative materialism and the propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy 78:67–90.Google Scholar
Dove, G. (2009) Beyond perceptual symbols: A call for representational pluralism. Cognition 110:412–31.Google Scholar
Dunn, J. C. & Kirsner, K. (1988) Discovering functionally independent mental processes: The principle of reversed association. Psychological Review 95:91–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, J. C. & Kirsner, K. (2003) What can we infer from double dissociations? Cortex 39:1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, K. (2009) What concepts do. Synthese 170:289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2007) Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgement. Routledge.Google Scholar
Evans, J. S. B. T. & Frankish, K., eds. (2009) In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, A. & Heit, E., eds. (2007) Inductive reasoning: Experimental, Developmental, and computational approaches. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1975) The language of thought. Crowell.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1998) Concepts, Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (2003) Is it a bird? Problems with old and new approaches to the theory of concepts. Times Literary Supplement, January 17, 2003, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (2008) LOT 2: The language of thought revisited. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gallese, V. & Lakoff, G. (2005) The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 21:455–79.Google Scholar
Gelman, R. (2004) Cognitive development. In: Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology, vol. 3: Memory and cognitive processes, ed. Pashler, H. & Medin, D. L., pp. 533–60. Wiley.Google Scholar
Gelman, S. A. (1988) The development of induction within natural kinds and artifacts categories. Cognitive Psychology 20:65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, S. A. (2003) The essential child. Origins of essentialism in everyday thought. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gelman, S. A. & Markman, E. (1986) Categories and induction in young children. Cognition 23:183–209.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. & Regier, T. P. (1996) How do we tell an association from a rule? Psychological Bulletin 119:23–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M. & the ABC Research Group (1999) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. (1997) What memory is for? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:1–55.Google Scholar
Glymour, C. (1994) On the methods of cognitive neuropsychology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45:815–35.Google Scholar
Gopnik, A. (2003) The theory theory as an alternative to the innateness hypothesis. In: Chomsky and his critics, ed. Antony, L. & Hornstein, N., pp. 238–54. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D., Schulz, L., Kushnir, T. & Danks, D. (2004) A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review 111:1–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. (1997) Words, thoughts, and theories. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M. & Cohen, J. D. (2001) An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral Judgment. Science 293:2105–108.Google Scholar
Griffiths, P. E. (1997) What emotions really are. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, T. L., Steyvers, M. & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007) Topics in semantic representation. Psychological Review 114:211–44.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. A. (1979) Polymorphous concepts in semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18:441–61.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. A. (1981) An investigation of the nature of abstract concepts. Memory and Cognition 9:149–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hampton, J. A. (1993) Prototype models of concept representation. In: Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis, ed. Van Mechelen, I., J. A., Hampton, Michalski, R. S. & Theuns, P., pp. 67–95. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. A. (2006) Concepts as prototypes. In: The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, vol. 46, ed. Ross, B. H., pp. 79–113. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. A. (2007) Typicality, graded membership, and vagueness. Cognitive Science 31:355–84.Google Scholar
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I. & Pulvermüller, F. (2004) Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41:301–07.Google Scholar
Heit, E. (2000) Properties of inductive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 7:569–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoenig, K., Sim, E.-J., Bochev, V., Herrnberger, B. & Kiefer, M. (2008) Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: Dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motor, and motion-related areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(10):1799–814.Google Scholar
James, T. W. & Gauthier, I. (2003) Auditory and action semantic features activate sensory-specific perceptual brain regions. Current Biology 13:1792–96.Google Scholar
Kable, J. W., Kan, I. P., Wilson, A., Thompson-Schill, S. L. & Chatterjee, A. (2005) Conceptual representations of action in the lateral temporal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17:1855–870.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C. (1989) Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C., Carter Smith, W., Simons, D. J. & Levin, D. T. (1998) Two dogmas of conceptual empiricism: Implications for hybrid models of the structure of knowledge. Cognition 65:103–35.Google Scholar
Kiefer, M., Sim, E.-J., Liebich, S., Hauk, O. & Tanaka, J. (2007) Experience-dependent plasticity of conceptual representations in human sensory–motor areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19:525–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurence, S. & Margolis, E. (1999) Concepts and cognitive science. In: Concepts, core readings, ed. Margolis, E. & Laurence, S., pp. 3–82. MIT Press.Google Scholar
López, A., Atran, S., Coley, J. D., Medin, D. L. & Smith, E. E. (1997) The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology 32:251–95.Google Scholar
Machery, E. (2005) Concepts are not a natural kind. Philosophy of Science 72:444–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. (2006a) How to split concepts. Reply to Piccinini and Scott. Philosophy of Science 73:410–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. (2006c) Two dogmas of neo-empiricism. Philosophy Compass 1:398–412.Google Scholar
Machery, E. (2007) Concept empiricism: A methodological critique. Cognition 104:19–46.Google Scholar
Machery, E. (2009) Doing without concepts. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Machery, E. & Seppälä, S. (forthcoming) Against hybrid theories of concepts. Anthropology & Philosophy.Google Scholar
Mahon, B. Z. & Caramazza, A. (2008) A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology, Paris 102:59–70.Google Scholar
Mahon, B. Z. & Caramazza, A. (2009) Concepts and categories: A cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 60:27–51.Google Scholar
Mallon, R. (2006) “Race”: Normative, not metaphysical or semantic. Ethics 116:525–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mallon, R., Machery, E., Nichols, S. & Stich, S. P. (2009) Against arguments from reference. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79:332–56.Google Scholar
Malt, B. C. (1994) Water is not H2O. Cognitive Psychology 27:41–70.Google Scholar
Malt, B. C. & Sloman, S. A. (2007) Artifact categorization: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In: Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation, ed. Margolis, E. & Laurence, S., pp. 85–123. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Margolis, E. (1994) A reassessment of the shift from the classical theory of concepts to prototype theory. Cognition 51:73–89.Google Scholar
Margolis, E. (1995) The significance of the theory analogy in the psychological study of concepts. Mind and Language 10:45–71.Google Scholar
Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (2006) Concepts. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts/.Google Scholar
Martin, A. (2007) The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology 58:25–45.Google Scholar
Martin, A. & Chao, L. L. (2001) Semantic memory and the brain: Structure and processes. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 11:194–201.Google Scholar
Martin, A., Haxby, J. V., Lalonde, F. M., Wiggs, C. L. & Ungerleider, L. G. (1995) Discrete cortical regions associated with knowledge of color and knowledge of action. Science 270:102–05.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medin, D. L., Lynch, E. B. & Solomon, K. O. (2000) Are there kinds of concepts? Annual Review of Psychology 51:121–47.Google Scholar
Medin, D. L. & Schaffer, M. M. (1978) Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 85:207–38.Google Scholar
Millikan, R. G. (2000) On clear and confused ideas: An essay about substance concepts. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Minda, J. P. & Smith, J. D. (2001) Prototypes in category learning: The effects of category size, category structure, and stimulus complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27:775–99.Google Scholar
Murphy, D. & Stich, S. P. (1999) Griffiths, elimination and psychopathology. Metascience 8:13–25.Google Scholar
Murphy, G. L. (2002) The big book of concepts. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, G. L. & Medin, D. L. (1985) The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92:289–316.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986) Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 10:104–14.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M. (1992) Exemplar-based approach to relating categorization, identification, and recognition. In: Multidimensional models of perception and cognition, ed. Ashby, F. G., pp. 363–93. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M., Palmeri, T. J. & McKinley, S. C. (1994) Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning. Psychological Review 101:266–300.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M. & Stanton, R. D. (2005) Speeded classification in a probabilistic category structure: Contrasting exemplar-retrieval, decision-boundary, and prototype models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 31:608–29.Google Scholar
Osherson, D. N. & Smith, E. E. (1981) On the adequacy of prototype theory as a theory of concepts. Cognition 9:35–58.Google Scholar
Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A. & Shafir, E. (1990) Category-based induction. Psychological review 97:185–200.Google Scholar
Peacocke, C. (1992) A study of concepts. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Peacocke, C. (2008) Truly understood. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R. & Barsalou, L. W. (2004) Sensorimotor simulations underlie conceptual representations: Modality-specific effects of prior activation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 11:164–67.Google Scholar
Piccinini, G. & Scott, S. (2006) Splitting concepts. Philosophy of Science 73:390–409.Google Scholar
Plaut, D. C. (1995) Double dissociation without modularity: Evidence from connectionist neuropsychology. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 17:291–21.Google Scholar
Prinz, J. J. (2002) Furnishing the mind: Concepts and their perceptual basis. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prinz, J. J. (2005) The return of concept empiricism. In: Handbook of categorization in cognitive science, ed. Cohen, H. & Lefebvre, C.. pp. 679–95. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Proffitt, J. B., Coley, J. D. & Medin, D. L. (2000) Expertise and category-based induction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26:811–28.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F. (2005) Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6:576–82.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F. & Hauk, O. (2006) Category-specific conceptual processing of color and form in left fronto-temporal cortex. Cerebral Cortex 16:1193–1201.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. (1969) Natural kinds. In: Ontological relativity and other essays, ed. Quine, W. V. O., pp. 114–38. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rehder, B. (2003a) A causal-model theory of conceptual representation and categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29:1141–59.Google ScholarPubMed
Rehder, B. (2006) When causality and similarity compete in category-based property induction. Memory and Cognition 34:3–16.Google Scholar
Rehder, B. & Kim, S. (2006) How causal knowledge affects classification: A generative theory of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32:659–83.Google Scholar
Rey, G. (1983) Concepts and stereotypes. Cognition 15:237–62.Google Scholar
Rey, G. (1985) Concepts and conceptions: A reply to Smith, Medin and Rips. Cognition 19:297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rey, G. (2009b) Review of E. Machery, Doing without Concepts. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. (Online journal. Epub: 2009.07.15.) Available at http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=16608 Google Scholar
Rips, L. J. (1989) Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In: Similarity and analogical reasoning, ed. Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A., pp. 21–59. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E. & Mervis, C. B. (1975) Family resemblance: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7:573–605.Google Scholar
Roth, E. M. & Shoben, E. J. (1983) The effect of context on the structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 15:346–78.Google Scholar
Russell, B. (1948) Human knowledge: Its scope and its limits. Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Shallice, T. (1988) From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, W. K., Ramjee, V., Beauchamp, M. S., McRae, K., Martin, A. & Barsalou, L. W. (2007) A common neural substrate for perceiving and knowing about color. Neuropsychologia 45:2802–10.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1995) Machine as mind. In: Android epistemology, ed. Ford, K. M., Glymour, C. & Hayes, P. J., pp. 23–40. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sloman, S. A. (1993) Feature-based induction. Cognitive Psychology 25:231–80.Google Scholar
Sloman, S. A. (1996) The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 119:3–22.Google Scholar
Sloman, S. A. & Lagnado, D. (2005) The problem of induction. In: The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning, ed. Holyoak, K. & Morrison, R., pp. 95–116. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, E. E., Patalano, A. L. & Jonides, J. (1998) Alternative strategies of categorization. Cognition 65:167–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, J. D. (2002) Exemplar theory's predicted typicality gradient can be tested and disconfirmed. Psychological Science 13:437–42.Google Scholar
Smith, J. D. & Minda, J. P. (1998) Prototypes in the mist: The early epochs of category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24:1411–36.Google Scholar
Smith, J. D. & Minda, J. P. (2000) Thirty categorization results in search of a model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26:3–27.Google Scholar
Smith, L. B. & Samuelson, L. K. (1997) Perceiving and remembering: Category stability, variability and development. In: Knowledge, concepts, and categories, ed. Lamberts, K. & Shanks, D., pp. 161–96. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Solomon, K. O. & Barsalou, L. W. (2001) Representing properties locally. Cognitive Psychology 43:129–69.Google Scholar
Solomon, K. O. & Barsalou, L. W. (2004) Perceptual simulation in property verification. Memory and Cognition 32:244–59.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1998) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In: Language and thought: Interdisciplinary themes, ed. Carruthers, P. & Boucher, J., pp. 184–200. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stich, S. P. (1983) From folk psychology to cognitive science. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stich, S. P. (1996) Deconstructing the mind. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tenenbaum, J. B., Griffiths, T. L. & Niyogi, S. (2007) Intuitive theories as grammars for causal inference. In: Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation, ed. Gopnik, A. & Schulz, L., pp. 301–22. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2003) Neuroimaging studies of semantic memory: Inferring “how” from “where.” Neuropsychologia 41:280–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Orden, G. C., Pennington, B. F. & Stone, G. O. (2001) What do double dissociations prove? Cognitive Science 25:111–72.Google Scholar
Whitney, P., McKay, T., Kellas, G. & Emerson, W. A. Jr. (1985) Semantic activation of noun concepts in context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 20:804–23.Google Scholar
Yaxley, R. H. & Zwaan, R. A. (2007) Simulating visibility during language comprehension. Cognition 105:229–36.Google Scholar
Ziff, E. (1972) Understanding understanding. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar