Graduate studies at Western
Mind and Language 24 (5):605-630 (2009)
|Abstract||The proposal that the concept of innateness expresses a 'folk biological' theory of the 'inner natures' of organisms was tested by examining the response of biologically naive participants to a series of realistic scenarios concerning the development of birdsong. Our results explain the intuitive appeal of existing philosophical analyses of the innateness concept. They simultaneously explain why these analyses are subject to compelling counterexamples. We argue that this explanation undermines the appeal of these analyses, whether understood as analyses of the vernacular concept or as explications of that concept for the purposes of science.|
|Keywords||experimental philosophy philosophy of biology innateness|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Similar books and articles
Muhammad Ali Khalidi (2009). Should We Eliminate the Innate? Reply to Griffiths and Machery. Philosophical Psychology 22 (4):505 – 519.
Jonathan Birch (2009). Irretrievably Confused? Innateness in Explanatory Context. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 40 (4):296-301.
Matteo Mameli & Patrick Bateson (2006). Innateness and the Sciences. Biology and Philosophy 21 (2):155-188.
Paul E. Griffiths & Edouard Machery (2008). Innateness, Canalization, and 'Biologicizing the Mind'. Philosophical Psychology 21 (3):397 – 414.
David Wendler (1996). Innateness as an Explanatory Concept. Biology and Philosophy 11 (1):89-116.
Paul Griffiths (2002). What is Innateness? The Monist 85 (1):70-85.
Jonathan M. Weinberg & Ron Mallon (2008). Living with Innateness (and Environmental Dependence Too). Philosophical Psychology 21 (3):415 – 424.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #19,325 of 740,856 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #11,492 of 740,856 )
How can I increase my downloads?