David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 125 (2):219-250 (2005)
Fodor argues that our minds must have epistemic limitations because there must be endogenous constraints on the class of concepts we can acquire. However, his argument for the existence of these endogenous constraints is falsified by the phenomenon of the deferential acquisition of concepts. If we allow for the acquisition of concepts through deferring to experts and scientific instruments, then our conceptual capacity will be without endogenous constraints, and there will be no reason to think that our minds are epistemically bounded
|Keywords||Acquisition Capacity Concept Epistemology Limitation Fodor, Jerry|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Howard Sankey (2010). Descartes's Language Test and Ape Language Research. Teorema 29 (2):111-123.
Dunja Jutronic (2001). Is There a Third Way of Concept Acquisition? Acta Analytica 16 (26):97-108.
Daniel A. Weiskopf & William P. Bechtel (2004). Remarks on Fodor on Having Concepts. Mind and Language 19 (1):48-56.
Lawrence J. Kaye (1993). Are Most of Our Concepts Innate? Synthese 2 (2):187-217.
Fiona Cowie (1998). Mad Dog Nativism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (2):227-252.
Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence (2011). Learning Matters: The Role of Learning in Concept Acquisition. Mind and Language 26 (5):507-539.
Andre Kukla (1993). Epistemic Boundedness. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (2):121 – 126.
John Sarnecki (2006). Retracing Our Steps: Fodor's New Old Way with Concept Acquisition. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 21 (40):41-73.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #73,427 of 1,004,688 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,235 of 1,004,688 )
How can I increase my downloads?