Skip to main content
Log in

Can we do without concepts?

Comments on Edouard Machery, Doing Without Concepts

  • Published:
Philosophical Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Notes

  1. Readers familiar with the topic of vagueness will recognize this as the so-called dynamic version of the sorites.

  2. The two colleagues are Del Lindsey and Angela Brown, psychologists of vision at Ohio State University.

References

  • Elster, J. (1976). A note on hysteresis in the social sciences. Synthese, 33, 371–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. New York: Perseus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliva, T. A., Oliver, R. L., & MacMillan, I. C. (1992). A catastrophe model for developing service satisfaction strategies. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., & Achee, J. (1994). Aggression, love, conformity, and other social psychological catastrophes. In A. Nowak & R. Vallacher (Eds.), Dynamical systems in social psychology (pp. 96–108). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Maas, H., Kolstein, R., & van der Pligt, J. (2003). Sudden transitions in attitudes. Sociological Methods Research, 32, 125–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana Raffman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Raffman, D. Can we do without concepts?. Philos Stud 149, 423–427 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-010-9529-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-010-9529-9

Keywords

Navigation