David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):367-386 (2013)
The idea that there is a “Number Sense” (Dehaene, 1997) or “Core Knowledge” of number ensconced in a modular processing system (Carey, 2009) has gained popularity as the study of numerical cognition has matured. However, these claims are generally made with little, if any, detailed examination of which modular properties are instantiated in numerical processing. In this article, I aim to rectify this situation by detailing the modular properties on display in numerical cognitive processing. In the process, I review literature from across the cognitive sciences and describe how the evidence reported in these works supports the hypothesis that numerical cognitive processing is modular. I outline the properties that would suffice for deeming a certain processing system a modular processing system. Subsequently, I use behavioral, neuropsychological, philosophical, and anthropological evidence to show that the number module is domain specific, informationally encapsulated, neurally localizable, subject to specific pathological breakdowns, mandatory, fast, and inaccessible at the person level; in other words, I use the evidence to demonstrate that some of our numerical capacity is housed in modular casing
|Keywords||Modularity Numerical Cognition Automaticity Cognitive Architecture Mental Processes Nativism Analog Magnitudes|
|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
Michael L. Anderson (2010). Neural Reuse: A Fundamental Organizational Principle of the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):245.
Clark H. Barrett & R. Kurzban (2006). Modularity in Cognition: Framing the Debate. Psychological Review 113:628-647.
Elizabeth M. Brannon (2002). The Development of Ordinal Numerical Knowledge in Infancy. Cognition 83 (3):223-240.
Elizabeth M. Brannon, Sara Abbott & Donna J. Lutz (2004). Number Bias for the Discrimination of Large Visual Sets in Infancy. Cognition 93 (2):B59-B68.
Susan Carey (2009). The Origin of Concepts. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Stanislas Dehaene, Elizabeth Spelke & Lisa Feigenson (2004). Core Systems of Number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8 (7):307-314.
Michael K. Cundall (2006). Rethinking the Divide: Modules and Central Systems. Philosophia 34 (4):379-393.
Philip Gerrans (2002). Nativism, Neuroconstructivism, and Developmental Disorder. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):757-758.
Eric Mandelbaum, Ballistic, Automatic, Mandatory: On An Ambiguity in Mandatory Perceptual Processing.
Korbinian Moeller, Elise Klein & Hans-Christoph Nuerk (2013). Influences of Cognitive Control on Numerical Cognition—Adaptation by Binding for Implicit Learning. Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (2):335-353.
Lelio Camilleri (1992). On Music Perception and Cognition: Modularity, Structure, and Processing. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 2 (4):365-377.
Irene Appelbaum (1998). Fodor, Modularity, and Speech Perception. Philosophical Psychology 11 (3):317-330.
H. Clark Barrett (2005). Enzymatic Computation and Cognitive Modularity. Mind and Language 20 (3):259-87.
Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis (2007). Linguistic Determinism and the Innate Basis of Number. In Peter Carruthers (ed.), The Innate Mind: Foundations and the Future.
Clark H. Barrett (2005). Enzymatic Computation and Cognitive Modularity. Mind and Language 20 (3):259-287.
Elizabeth Spelke (2005). Chronometric Studies of Numerical Cognition in Five-Month-Old Infants. Cognition 97 (1):23-39.
Justin N. Wood & Elizabeth S. Spelke (2005). Chronometric Studies of Numerical Cognition in Five-Month-Old Infants. Cognition 97 (1):23-39.
Peter Carruthers (2003). Is the Mind a System of Modules Shaped by Natural Selection? In Christopher R. Hitchcock (ed.), Contemporary Debates in the Philosophy of Science. Blackwell.
Added to index2012-11-06
Total downloads98 ( #12,740 of 1,099,913 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #40,772 of 1,099,913 )
How can I increase my downloads?