David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Explorations 8 (3):217-227 (2005)
A number of developmental psychologists have argued for a theory they call the theory theory - a theory of cognitive development that suggests that infants and small children make sense of their world by constructing cognitive representations that have many of the attributes of scientific theories. In this paper I argue that there are indeed close parallels between the activities of children and scientists, but that these parallels will be better understood if one recognizes that both scientists and children are not so much theorists as model builders
|Keywords||Children Cognitive Science Psychology Science Gopnik, Alison|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Pierre Poirier & Guillaume Beaulac (2011). Le véritable retour des définitions. Dialogue 50 (1):153-164.
Bill Wringe (2011). Cognitive Individualism and the Child as Scientist Program. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 42 (4):518-529.
Similar books and articles
Alison Gopnik (1998). Explanation as Orgasm. Minds and Machines 8 (1):101-118.
A. Fine (1996). Science as Child's Play: Tales From the Crib. Philosophy of Science 63 (4):534-37.
Luc Faucher, Ron Mallon, Daniel Nazer, Shaun Nichols, Aaron Ruby, Stephen Stich & Jonathan Weinberg (2002). 18 The Baby in the Lab-Coat: Why Child Development is Not an Adequate Model for Understanding the Development of Science. In Peter Carruthers, Stephen P. Stich & Michael Siegal (eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press.
Stephen M. Downes (1999). Can Scientific Development and Children's Cognitive Development Be the Same Process? Philosophy of Science 66 (4):565-578.
Susan Carey & Elizabeth Spelke (1996). Science and Core Knowledge. Philosophy of Science 63 (4):515 - 533.
A. M. & M. S. (2002). The Theory Theory Thrice Over: The Child as Scientist, Superscientist or Social Institution? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):117-132.
Daniel Nazer, Aaron Ruby, Shaun Nichols, Jonathan Weinberg, Stephen Stich, Luc Faucher & Ron Mallon (2002). The Baby in the Lab-Coat: Why Child Development is Not an Adequate Model for Understanding the Development of Science. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich & M. Siegal (eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press.
Michael A. Bishop (2002). The Theory Theory Thrice Over: The Child as Scientist, Superscientist, or Social Institution? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 33 (1):121-36.
Alison Gopnik (1997). The Scientist as Child. Philosophy of Science 63 (4):485-514.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #65,513 of 1,100,079 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #304,128 of 1,100,079 )
How can I increase my downloads?