A recipe for concept similarity

Mind and Language 22 (1):68-91 (2007)
Sometimes your concept and mine have exactly the same content. When this is so, it is comparatively easy for me to understand what you say when you deploy your concept, for us to disagree, agree, and so on. But what if your concept and mine do not have exactly the same content? This question has occupied a number of philosophers, including Paul Churchland, Jerry Fodor, and Ernie Lepore. This paper develops a novel and rigorous measure of concept similarity, Proportion, such that concepts with different contents but sufficiently high Proportion scores will also conduce to understanding, agreement, and disagreement.
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2006.00300.x
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
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

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Jan Engberg (2009). Individual Conceptual Structure and Legal Experts' Efficient Communication. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 22 (2):223-243.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

56 ( #61,286 of 1,727,148 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

5 ( #136,556 of 1,727,148 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.