Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-6lqsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-22T10:37:05.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Précis of The Origin of Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2011

Susan Carey
Susan Carey
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138scarey@wjh.harvard.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A theory of conceptual development must specify the innate representational primitives, must characterize the ways in which the initial state differs from the adult state, and must characterize the processes through which one is transformed into the other. The Origin of Concepts (henceforth TOOC) defends three theses. With respect to the initial state, the innate stock of primitives is not limited to sensory, perceptual, or sensorimotor representations; rather, there are also innate conceptual representations. With respect to developmental change, conceptual development consists of episodes of qualitative change, resulting in systems of representation that are more powerful than, and sometimes incommensurable with, those from which they are built. With respect to a learning mechanism that achieves conceptual discontinuity, I offer Quinian bootstrapping. TOOC concludes with a discussion of how an understanding of conceptual development constrains a theory of concepts.

Keywords

bootstrappingconceptcore cognitiondevelopmental discontinuityinnate primitive
Type
Target Article
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , June 2011 , pp. 113 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Berkeley, G. (1732/1919) A new theory of vision and other select philosophical writings. E.P Dutton.Google Scholar
Block, N. J. (1986) Advertisement for a semantics for psychology. In: Midwest studies in philosophy, ed. French, P. A., pp. 615–78. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Carey, S. (2009) The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1975) The language of thought. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1980) On the impossibility of acquiring “more powerful” structures: Fixation of belief and concept. In: Language and learning, ed. Piatelli-Palmerini, M., pp. 142–62. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1983) The modularity of mind. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1998) Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, R. & Gallistel, C. R. (1978/1985/1986) The child's understanding of number. Harvard University Press. (Second printing, 1985. Paperback issue with new preface, 1986.)Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (2002) Analogy in scientific discovery: The case of Jonannes Kepler. In: Model-based reasoning: Science, technology, values, ed. Magnani, L. & Nersessian, N. J., pp. 21–39. Kluwer Academic/Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, H. E. & Barrett, P. H. (1974) Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. E. P. Dutton.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. (1972/1980) Naming and necessity. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. (1690/1975) An essay concerning human understanding. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1986) A border dispute: The place of logic in psychology. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Michotte, A. (1963) The perception of causality. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Murphy, G. L. (2002) The big book of concepts. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. (1992) How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In: Cognitive models of science, ed. Giere, R., pp. 3–44. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. Routledge and Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1994) The language instinct. William Morrow.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. (1975) The meaning of meaning. In Language, mind, and knowledge, ed. Gunderson, K.. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. (2002) Mental imagery: In search of a theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25(2):157–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quine, W. V. O. (1960) Word and object. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Smith, C. L. (2007) Bootstrapping processes in the development of students' commonsense matter theories: Using analogical mappings, thought experiments, and learning to measure to promote conceptual restructuring. Cognition and Instruction 25(4):337–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelke, E. (2000) Core knowledge. American Psychologist 55:1233–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed