Journal of Philosophy 95 (3):105-132 (1998)
|Abstract||Cognitive definitions cannot accommodate fear as it occurs in species incapable of sophisticated cognition. Some think that fear must, therefore, be noncognitive. This paper explores another option, arguably more in line with evolutionary theory: that like other "biological universals" fear admits of variation across and within species. A paradigm case of such universals is species: it is argued that they can be defined by ostension in the manner of Putnam and Kripke without implying that they must have an invariable essence. Emotions can be defined in this way too, in principle, but the theoretical understanding of homology necessary to do so is lacking at present.|
|Keywords||Natural Kinds emotion homology species|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Frederic Tremblay (2011). Nicolai Hartmann's Definition of Biological Species. In Roberto Poli, Carlo Scognamiglio & Frederic Tremblay (eds.), The Philosophy of Nicolai Hartmann. Walter de Gruyter.
Hugh Lehman (1967). Are Biological Species Real? Philosophy of Science 34 (2):157-167.
David L. Hull (1980). On Human Nature. Environmental Ethics 2 (1):81-88.
Nicole Leroux, What Are Biological Species? : The Impact of the Current Debate in Taxonomy on the Species Problem.
Samir Okasha (2002). Darwinian Metaphysics: Species and the Question of Essentialism. Synthese 131 (2):191-213.
David B. Kitts & David J. Kitts (1979). Biological Species as Natural Kinds. Philosophy of Science 46 (4):613-622.
Mark Ridley (1989). The Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 4 (1):1-16.
Michael Ruse (1987). Biological Species: Natural Kinds, Individuals, or What? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (2):225-242.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads35 ( #34,083 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,729 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?