Jerry Fodor has argued that virtually all lexical concepts are innate. I argue against this position, but not, as other have done, on the grounds that the arguments against lexical decomposition upon which Fodor relies are flawed. Rather, I argue that even if lexical concepts cannot be decomposed, the possession conditions for having lexical concepts are nonetheless not innately satisfied.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Retracing Our Steps: Fodor's New Old Way with Concept Acquisition. [REVIEW]John Sarnecki - 2006 - Acta Analytica 21 (40):41-73.
The Empirical Case Against Analyticity: Two Options for Concept Pragmatists.Bradley Rives - 2009 - Minds and Machines 19 (2):199-227.
How Words Mean: Lexical Concepts, Cognitive Models, and Meaning Construction.Vyvyan Evans - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
Why Compositionality Won't Go Away: Reflections on Horwich's 'Deflationary' Theory.Jerry Fodor & Ernie Lepore - 2001 - Ratio 14 (4):350–368.
Added to index2011-01-07
Total downloads20 ( #242,627 of 2,153,476 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #184,837 of 2,153,476 )
How can I increase my downloads?