No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Wired for society? From ego-logy to eco-logy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 June 2024
Abstract
Somewhat questioning Elizabeth Spelke's attempt to account for infants’ social knowledge, our commentary argues that social cognition might be divided into several specialized systems. In addition to the core system dedicated to the intersubjective dimension of close relationships, infants could be prewired to process social relationships, such as dominance, characterized by their impersonal, normative dimension.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Charafeddine, R., Mercier, H., Clément, F., Kaufmann, L., Berchtold, A., Reboul, A., & Van der Henst, J.-B. (2015). How preschoolers use cues of dominance to make sense of their social environment. Journal of Cognition and Development, 16(4), 587–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clément, F., Bernard, S., & Kaufmann, L. (2011). Social cognition is not reducible to theory of mind: When children use deontic rules to predict the behaviour of others. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 910–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschfeld, L. A. (2001). On a folk theory of society: Children, evolution, and mental representations of social groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hrdy, S. B., & Burkart, J. M. (2020). The emergence of emotionally modern humans: Implications for language and learning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1803), 20190499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackendoff, R. S. (1999). The natural logic of rights and obligations. In Jackendoff, R., Bloom, P., & Wynn, K. (Eds.), Language, logic, and concepts: Essays in memory of John Macnamara (pp. 67–95). MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, L., & Clément, F. (2014). Wired for society: Cognizing pathways to society and culture. Topoi, 33, 459–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2007). Core systems in human cognition. Progress in Brain Research, 164, 257–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(07)64014-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mascaro, O., & Csibra, G. (2012). Representation of stable social dominance relations by human infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 6862–6867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pun, A., Birch, S. A., & Baron, A. S. (2016). Infants use relative numerical group size to infer social dominance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(9), 2376–2381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rochat, P. (2003). Five-levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness and Cognition, 12, 717–731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, E. S. (2022). What babies know: Core knowledge and composition. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. J., Woo, B., Nettle, D., Spelke, E. S., & Saxe, R. (2022). Early concepts of intimacy: Young humans use saliva sharing to infer close relationships. Science (New York, N.Y.), 375(6578), 311–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomsen, L., Frankenhuis, W. E., Ingold-Smith, M. C., & Carey, S. (2011). Big and mighty: Preverbal infants mentally represent social dominance. Science (New York, N.Y.), 331, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Précis of What Babies Know
Related commentaries (25)
Concepts, core knowledge, and the rationalism–empiricism debate
Core knowledge and its role in explaining uniquely human cognition: Some questions
Core knowledge as a neuro-ethologist views it
Core knowledge, visual illusions, and the discovery of the self
Developmental origin of a language–cognition interface in infants: Gateway to advancing core knowledge?
Divisive language
Early pragmatic expectations in human infancy
Evidence for core social goal understanding (and, perhaps, core morality) in preverbal infants
How do babies come to know what babies know?
How important is it to learn language rather than create it?
Investigating infant knowledge with representational similarity analysis
Is core knowledge a natural subdivision of infant cognition?
Is there only one innate modular system for spatial navigation?
Learning in the social being system
More than language is needed to represent and combine different core knowledge components
Not all core knowledge systems are created equal, and they are subject to revision in both children and adults
Perceptual (roots of) core knowledge
Questioning the nature and origins of the “social agent” concept
Substances as a core domain
The brain origins of early social cognition
The key to understanding core knowledge resides in the fetus
The role of language in transcending core knowledge
What we don't know about what babies know: Reconsidering psychophysics, exploration, and infant behavior
Where is the baby in core knowledge?
Wired for society? From ego-logy to eco-logy
Author response
Response to commentaries on What Babies Know