Search results for 'Domain-General' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Salomi S. Asaridou & James M. McQueen (2013). Speech and Music Shape the Listening Brain: Evidence for Shared Domain-General Mechanisms. Frontiers in Psychology 4.score: 210.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Ron Mallon, Ought We to Abandon a Domain-General Treatment of "Ought"?[I].score: 180.0
    Leda Cosmides and John Tooby have some advice for moral philosophers and deontic logicians trying to understand deontic notions like ought: give up trying to provide a univocal, domain-general treatment. The domain-specific character of human cognition means that such a research program is probably fruitless and probably pointless. It is probably fruitless, since a univocal account of the meaning of "ought" will not capture the multiple inferential patterns of deontic reasoning exhibited in different contexts (and similarly for lots of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. James L. McClelland, David C. Plaut, Stephen J. Gotts & Tiago V. Maia (2003). Developing a Domain-General Framework for Cognition: What is the Best Approach? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):611-614.score: 180.0
    We share with Anderson & Lebiere (A&L) (and with Newell before them) the goal of developing a domain-general framework for modeling cognition, and we take seriously the issue of evaluation criteria. We advocate a more focused approach than the one reflected in Newell's criteria, based on analysis of failures as well as successes of models brought into close contact with experimental data. A&L attribute the shortcomings of our parallel-distributed processing framework to a failure to acknowledge a symbolic level of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Hongbin Wang & Paul Bello (2006). Ritualized Behavior as a Domain-General Choice of Actions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (6):633-634.score: 180.0
    Although we agree that ritualized behavior is a mystery that calls out for an explanation, we do not think that the proposed domain-specific two-component system offers an empirically well-justified and theoretically parsimonious description of the phenomena. Instead, we believe that the deployment of domain-general mechanisms based on choice of actions could also explain the essential features of ritualized behavior. (Published Online February 8 2007).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Tonio Ball Isabella Mutschler, Céline Reinbold, Johanna Wankerl, Erich Seifritz (2013). Structural Basis of Empathy and the Domain General Region in the Anterior Insular Cortex. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7.score: 180.0
    Empathy is key for healthy social functioning and individual differences in empathy have strong implications for manifold domains of social behavior. Empathy comprises emotional and cognitive components, such as feeling and knowing what another person is feeling, and may also be closely linked to sensorimotor processes, which go along with the motivation and behavior to respond compassionately to another person’s feelings and to reduce another person’s pain. There is growing evidence for local plastic change in the structure of the healthy (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Vitória Piai, Ardi Roelofs, Daniel J. Acheson & Atsuko Takashima (2013). Attention for Speaking: Domain-General Control From the Anterior Cingulate Cortex in Spoken Word Production. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7:832.score: 180.0
    Accumulating evidence suggests that some degree of attentional control is required to regulate and monitor processes underlying speaking. Although progress has been made in delineating the neural substrates of the core language processes involved in speaking, substrates associated with regulatory and monitoring processes have remained relatively underspecified. We report the results of an fMRI study examining the neural substrates related to performance in three attention-demanding tasks varying in the amount of linguistic processing: vocal picture naming while ignoring distractors (picture-word interference, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Anthony P. Atkinson & M. Wheeler (2004). The Grain of Domains: The Evolutionary-Psychological Case Against Domain-General Cognition. Mind and Language 19 (2):147-76.score: 162.0
    Prominent evolutionary psychologists have argued that our innate psychological endowment consists of numerous domainspecific cognitive resources, rather than a few domaingeneral ones. In the light of some conceptual clarification, we examine the central inprinciple arguments that evolutionary psychologists mount against domaingeneral cognition. We conclude (a) that the fundamental logic of Darwinism, as advanced within evolutionary psychology, does not entail that the innate mind consists exclusively, or even massively, of domainspecific features, and (b) that a mixed innate cognitive economy of domainspecific (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Vittorio Girotto & Katya Tentori (2008). Is Domain-General Thinking a Domain-Specific Adaptation? Mind and Society 7 (2):167-175.score: 156.0
    According to Kanazawa (Psychol Rev 111:512–523, 2004), general intelligence, which he considers as a synonym of abstract thinking, evolved specifically to allow our ancestors to deal with evolutionary novel problems while conferring no advantage in solving evolutionary familiar ones. We present a study whereby the results contradict Kanazawa’s hypothesis by demonstrating that performance on an evolutionary novel problem (an abstract reasoning task) predicts performance on an evolutionary familiar problem (a social reasoning task).
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Vladimir M. Sloutsky (2010). Mechanisms of Cognitive Development: Domain-General Learning or Domain-Specific Constraints? Cognitive Science 34 (7):1125-1130.score: 150.0
  10. Elizabeth Bates, Frederic Dick & Beverly Wulfeck (1999). Not so Fast: Domain-General Factors Can Account for Selective Deficits in Grammatical Processing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):96-97.score: 150.0
    Normals display selective deficits in morphology and syntax under adverse processing conditions. Digit loads do not impair processing of passives and object relatives but do impair processing of grammatical morphemes. Perceptual degradation and temporal compression selectively impair several aspects of grammar, including passives and object relatives. Hence we replicate Caplan & Waters's specific findings but reach opposite conclusions, based on wider evidence.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Valerie A. Thompson (2000). The Task-Specific Nature of Domain-General Reasoning. Cognition 76 (3):209-268.score: 150.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Irene P. Kan, Susan Teubner-Rhodes, Anna B. Drummey, Lauren Nutile, Lauren Krupa & Jared M. Novick (2013). To Adapt or Not to Adapt: The Question of Domain-General Cognitive Control. Cognition 129 (3):637-651.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Natasha Z. Kirkham, Jonathan A. Slemmer & Scott P. Johnson (2002). Visual Statistical Learning in Infancy: Evidence for a Domain General Learning Mechanism. Cognition 83 (2):B35-B42.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. M. C. McKinnon & M. Moscovitch (2007). Domain-General Contributions to Social Reasoning: Theory of Mind and Deontic Reasoning Re-Explored. Cognition 102 (2):179-218.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Wang Hongbin & Bello Paul (2006). Ritualized Behavior as a Domain-General Choice of Actions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (6).score: 150.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Kevin MacDonald (2014). Domain-General Mechanisms: What They Are, How They Evolved, and How They Interact with Modular, Domain-Specific Mechanisms to Enable Cohesive Human Groups. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37 (4):430-431.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Alia Martin & Laurie R. Santos (2014). Understanding the Role of Mirror Neurons in Action Understanding Will Require More Than a Domain-General Account. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37 (2):211.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Dulas M. (2010). Frontal Activity Changes at Study and Test Underlie Domain General Source Memory Impairments in Older Adults. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 4.score: 150.0
  19. Ayse P. Saygin & Frederic Dick (2014). The Emergence of Mirror-Like Response Properties From Domain-General Principles in Vision and Audition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37 (2):219.score: 150.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Sandra E. Trehub & Erin E. Hannon (2006). Infant Music Perception: Domain-General or Domain-Specific Mechanisms? Cognition 100 (1):73-99.score: 150.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Sandra R. Waxman & Amy E. Booth (2001). On the Insufficiency of Evidence for a Domain-General Account of Word Learning. Cognition 78 (3):277-279.score: 150.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Reza Tavakol & Roustam Zalaletdinov (1998). On the Domain of Applicability of General Relativity. Foundations of Physics 28 (2):307-331.score: 144.0
    We consider the domain of applicability of general relativity (GR), as a classical theory of gravity, by considering its applications to a variety of settings of physical interest as well as its relationship with real observations. We argue that, as it stands, GR is deficient whether it is treated as a microscopic or a macroscopic theory of gravity. We briefly discuss some recent attempts at removing this shortcoming through the construction of a macroscopic theory of gravity. We point out that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. David Caplan & Gloria Waters (1999). Issues Regarding General and Domain-Specific Resources. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):114-122.score: 122.0
    Commentaries on our target article raise further questions about the validity of an undifferentiated central executive that supplies resources to all verbal tasks. Working memory tasks are more likely to measure divided attention capacities and the efficiency of performing tasks within specific domains than a shared resource pool. In our response to the commentaries, we review and further expand upon empirical findings that relate performance on working memory tasks to sentence processing, concluding that our view that the two are not (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Pw Cheng & Jh Larkin (1987). Teaching General Strategies and Domain-Specific Concepts in Physics. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 25 (5):328-329.score: 120.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Paul Sheldon Davies, James H. Fetzer & Thomas R. Foster (1995). Logical Reasoning and Domain Specificity. Biology and Philosophy 10 (1):1-37.score: 114.0
    The social exchange theory of reasoning, which is championed by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, falls under the general rubric evolutionary psychology and asserts that human reasoning is governed by content-dependent, domain-specific, evolutionarily-derived algorithms. According to Cosmides and Tooby, the presumptive existence of what they call cheater-detection algorithms disconfirms the claim that we reason via general-purpose mechanisms or via inductively acquired principles. We contend that the Cosmides/Tooby arguments in favor of domain-specific algorithms or evolutionarily-derived mechanisms fail and that the notion (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Michael R. Waldmann (2007). Combining Versus Analyzing Multiple Causes: How Domain Assumptions and Task Context Affect Integration Rules. Cognitive Science 31 (2):233-256.score: 90.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Liina Pylkkänen Douglas K. Bemis (2012). Combination Across Domains: An MEG Investigation Into the Relationship Between Mathematical, Pictorial, and Linguistic Processing. Frontiers in Psychology 3.score: 68.0
    Debates surrounding the evolution of language often hinge upon its relationship to cognition more generally and many investigations have attempted to demark the boundary between the two. Though results from these studies suggest that language may recruit domain-general mechanisms during certain types of complex processing, the domain-generality of basic combinatorial mechanisms that lie at the core of linguistic processing is still unknown. Our previous work (Bemis & Pylkkänen, 2011, 2012) used magnetoencephalography to isolate neural activity associated with the simple (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Peter Carruthers (2002). The Cognitive Functions of Language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):657-674.score: 66.0
    This paper explores a variety of different versions of the thesis that natural language is involved in human thinking. It distinguishes amongst strong and weak forms of this thesis, dismissing some as implausibly strong and others as uninterestingly weak. Strong forms dismissed include the view that language is conceptually necessary for thought (endorsed by many philosophers) and the view that language is _de facto_ the medium of all human conceptual thinking (endorsed by many philosophers and social scientists). Weak forms include (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. José Díez, Kareem Khalifa & Bert Leuridan (2013). General Theories of Explanation: Buyer Beware. Synthese 190 (3):379-396.score: 66.0
    We argue that there is no general theory of explanation that spans the sciences, mathematics, and ethics, etc. More specifically, there is no good reason to believe that substantive and domain-invariant constraints on explanatory information exist. Using Nickel (Noûs 44(2):305–328, 2010 ) as an exemplar of the contrary, generalist position, we first show that Nickel’s arguments rest on several ambiguities, and then show that even when these ambiguities are charitably corrected, Nickel’s defense of general theories of explanation is inadequate along (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Robert L. Goldstone & David Landy (2010). Domain-Creating Constraints. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1357-1377.score: 66.0
    The contributions to this special issue on cognitive development collectively propose ways in which learning involves developing constraints that shape subsequent learning. A learning system must be constrained to learn efficiently, but some of these constraints are themselves learnable. To know how something will behave, a learner must know what kind of thing it is. Although this has led previous researchers to argue for domain-specific constraints that are tied to different kinds/domains, an exciting possibility is that kinds/domains themselves can be (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. William R. Brown (1995). The Domain Constraint on Analogy and Analogical Argument. Informal Logic 17 (1).score: 66.0
    Domain constraint, the requirement that analogues be selected from "the same category," inheres in the popular saying "you can't compare apples and oranges" and the textbook principle "the greater the number of shared properties, the stronger the argument from analogy." I identify roles of domains in biological, linguistic, and legal analogy, supporting the account of law with a computer word search of judicial decisions. I argue that the category treatments within these disciplines cannot be exported to general informal logic, where (...)
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Erich Rast (2013). On Contextual Domain Restriction in Categorial Grammar. Synthese 190 (12):2085-2115.score: 66.0
    Abstract -/- Quantifier domain restriction (QDR) and two versions of nominal restriction (NR) are implemented as restrictions that depend on a previously introduced interpreter and interpretation time in a two-dimensional semantic framework on the basis of simple type theory and categorial grammar. Against Stanley (2002) it is argued that a suitable version of QDR can deal with superlatives like tallest. However, it is shown that NR is needed to account for utterances when the speaker intends to convey different restrictions for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Darius Sauliūnas (2011). Domain Name Disputes in Lithuanian Courts: Silent Steps Towards Fairness on the Net. Jurisprudence 18 (3):943-961.score: 66.0
    National <.lt> domain name disputes in Lithuania are the ones which courts must decide without having any specific legal regulation. In such cases courts shall apply analogy of law, customs and general principals of law. Last but not least, the courts must address international legal practice as regards the domain name disputes, i.e. take into account the famous ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy adopted in 1999 and mostly applied by the panels of WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre while (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. José Luis Bermudez (2002). Domain-Generality and the Relative Pronoun. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):676-677.score: 64.0
    The hypothesis in the target paper is that the cognitive function of language lies in making possible the integration of different types of domain-specific information. The case for this hypothesis must consist, at least in part, of a constructive proposal as to what feature or features of natural language allows this integration to take place. This commentary suggests that the vital linguistic element is the relative pronoun and the possibility it affords of forming relative clauses.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Mariko Moher, Lisa Feigenson & Justin Halberda (2010). A One-to-One Bias and Fast Mapping Support Preschoolers' Learning About Faces and Voices. Cognitive Science 34 (5):719-751.score: 62.0
    A multimodal person representation contains information about what a person looks like and what a person sounds like. However, little is known about how children form these face-voice mappings. Here, we explored the possibility that two cognitive tools that guide word learning, a one-to-one mapping bias and fast mapping, also guide children’s learning about faces and voices. We taught 4- and 5-year-olds mappings between three individual faces and voices, then presented them with new faces and voices. In Experiment 1, we (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Christina Behme & H. S. (2008). Language Learning in Infancy: Does the Empirical Evidence Support a Domain Specific Language Acquisition Device? Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):641 – 671.score: 60.0
    Poverty of the Stimulus Arguments have convinced many linguists and philosophers of language that a domain specific language acquisition device (LAD) is necessary to account for language learning. Here we review empirical evidence that casts doubt on the necessity of this domain specific device. We suggest that more attention needs to be paid to the early stages of language acquisition. Many seemingly innate language-related abilities have to be learned over the course of several months. Further, the language input contains rich (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Vincent Lam & Michael Esfeld (2012). The Structural Metaphysics of Quantum Theory and General Relativity. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 43 (2):243-258.score: 60.0
    The paper compares ontic structural realism in quantum physics with ontic structural realism about space–time. We contend that both quantum theory and general relativity theory support a common, contentful metaphysics of ontic structural realism. After recalling the main claim of ontic structural realism and its physical support, we point out that both in the domain of quantum theory and in the domain of general relativity theory, there are objects whose essential ways of being are certain relations so that these objects (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Theodore Bach (2012). Analogical Cognition: Applications in Epistemology and the Philosophy of Mind and Language. Philosophy Compass 7 (5):348-360.score: 60.0
    Analogical cognition refers to the ability to detect, process, and learn from relational similarities. The study of analogical and similarity cognition is widely considered one of the ‘success stories’ of cognitive science, exhibiting convergence across many disciplines on foundational questions. Given the centrality of analogy to mind and knowledge, it would benefit philosophers investigating topics in epistemology and the philosophies of mind and language to become familiar with empirical models of analogical cognition. The goal of this essay is to describe (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Theodore Bach (2014). A Unified Account of General Learning Mechanisms and Theory‐of‐Mind Development. Mind and Language 29 (3):351-381.score: 60.0
    Modularity theorists have challenged that there are, or could be, general learning mechanisms that explain theory-of-mind development. In response, supporters of the ‘scientific theory-theory’ account of theory-of-mind development have appealed to children's use of auxiliary hypotheses and probabilistic causal modeling. This article argues that these general learning mechanisms are not sufficient to meet the modularist's challenge. The article then explores an alternative domain-general learning mechanism by proposing that children grasp the concept belief through the progressive alignment of relational structure (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Adee Matan & Sidney Strauss (1998). Relations Between Innate Endowments, Cognitive Development, Domain Specificity, and a Taxonomy-Creator. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):584-584.score: 60.0
    Atran proposes that humans have a unique, innate, domain-specific tendency to create taxonomies of biological kinds. We show that: (1) in ontogenesis, children develop a notion Atran claims to be innate; (2) what Atran claims is unique to biological kinds may be found in artifact kinds; and (3) although Atran proposes a domain-specific mental construct for biological rank, it can be explained in domain- general terms.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Kenneth R. Livingston (1998). The Case for General Mechanisms in Concept Formation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):581-582.score: 60.0
    Reasons are given for believing that it is premature to abandon the idea that domain-general models of concept learning can explain how human beings understand the biological world. Questions are raised about whether the evidence for domain specificity is convincing, and it is suggested that two constraints on domain-general concept learning models may be sufficient to account for the available data.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Michael Lamport Commons & Sara Nora Ross (2008). Toward a Cross-Species Measure of General Intelligence. World Futures 64 (5 - 7):383 – 398.score: 60.0
    Science requires postformal capabilities to compare competing explanations and conceptualize how to coordinate or integrate them. With conflicts thus reconciled, science advances. The Model of Hierarchical Complexity facilitates the coordination of current arguments about intelligence. A cross-species measurement theory of comparative cognition is proposed. It has potential to overcome the lack of a general measurement theory for the science of comparative cognition, and the lack of domain-general mechanisms for evolutionary psychologists. The hierarchical complexity of concepts and debates as well (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. James R. Hurford & Jean-Louis Dessalles (2002). The Problematic Transition From Specific Competences to General Competence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):690-691.score: 60.0
    Postulating a variety of mutually isolated thought domains for prelinguistic creatures is both unparsimonious and implausible, requiring unexplained parallel evolution of each separate module. Furthermore, the proposal that domain-general concepts are not accessible without prior exposure to phonetically realized human language utterances cannot be implemented by any concept-acquisition mechanism.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Annette Karmiloff-Smith (1994). Précis of Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4):693.score: 60.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Robert May, Comments on Nathan Salmon “Are General Terms Rigid”.score: 54.0
    1. Nathan Salmon paper is entitled with a question: are general terms rigid? He asks this question in way of engaging the issue of the extension of the notion of rigidity beyond the domain of singular terms. While singular terms has been the province of most of the discussion of this rigidity since Naming and Necessity, it is well known that Kripke saw the notion extending to at least certain general terms such as terms for natural kinds. Scott Soames has (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Barry Smith, Pierre Grenon & Louis Goldberg (2004). Biodynamic Ontology: Applying BFO in the Biomedical Domain. Studies in Health and Technology Informatics 102:20–38.score: 54.0
    Current approaches to formal representation in biomedicine are characterized by their focus on either the static or the dynamic aspects of biological reality. We here outline a theory that combines both perspectives and at the same time tackles the by no means trivial issue of their coherent integration. Our position is that a good ontology must be capable of accounting for reality both synchronically (as it exists at a time) and diachronically (as it unfolds through time), but that these are (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jurgen Naets (2010). How to Define a Number? A General Epistemological Account of Simon Stevin's Art of Defining. Topoi 29 (1):77-86.score: 54.0
    This paper explores Simon Stevin’s l’Arithmétique of 1585, where we find a novel understanding of the concept of number. I will discuss the dynamics between his practice and philosophy of mathematics, and put it in the context of his general epistemological attitude. Subsequently, I will take a close look at his justificational concerns, and at how these are reflected in his inductive, a postiori and structuralist approach to investigating the numerical field. I will argue that Stevin’s renewed conceptualisation of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Pascal Boyer (1998). Cultural Transmission with an Evolved Intuitive Ontology: Domain-Specific Cognitive Tracks of Inheritance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):570-571.score: 54.0
    Atran's account of cultural transmission can be further refined by considering constraints from early-developed, domain-specific intuitive ontological understanding. These suggest specific predictions about the cultural survival of “memes,” depending on the way they activate intuitive understanding. There is no general dynamic of cultural inheritance; only complex predictions for domain-specific competencies that cut across cultural domains.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Kai von Fintel, Quantifier Domain Selection and Pseudo-Scope.score: 54.0
    * This work has been evolving for a while now. Some parts trace back to the few pages on the context-dependency of quantifiers in my dissertation. Reading Recanati’s paper on domains of discourse made me rethink some of my earlier conclusions without in the end actually changing them much. Other parts formed the material for several discussions in my seminar on context-dependency at MIT in the fall of 1995, which included several sessions exploring the issues raised in an early version (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. A. J. Braunack-Mayer (2001). What Makes a Problem an Ethical Problem? An Empirical Perspective on the Nature of Ethical Problems in General Practice. Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (2):98-103.score: 54.0
    Next SectionWhilst there has been considerable debate about the fit between moral theory and moral reasoning in everyday life, the way in which moral problems are defined has rarely been questioned. This paper presents a qualitative analysis of interviews conducted with 15 general practitioners (GPs) in South Australia to argue that the way in which the bioethics literature defines an ethical dilemma captures only some of the range of lay views about the nature of ethical problems. The bioethics literature has (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000