Cognitive Science 45 (1):e12930 (2021)

Authors
Yasmina Jraissati
American University of Beirut
Abstract
Humans are poorer at identifying smells and communicating about them, compared to other sensory domains. They also cannot easily organize odor sensations in a general conceptual space, where geometric distance could represent how similar or different all odors are. These two generalities are more or less accepted by psychologists, and they are often seen as connected: If there is no conceptual space for odors, then olfactory identification should indeed be poor. We propose here an important revision to this conclusion: We believe that the claim that there is no odor space is true only if by odor space, one means a conceptual space representing all possible odor sensations, in the paradigmatic sense used for instance for color. However, in a less paradigmatic sense, local conceptual spaces representing a given subset of odors do exist. Thus the absence of a global odor space does not warrant the conclusion that there is no olfactory conceptual map at all. Here we show how a localist account provides a new interpretation of experts and cross‐cultural categorization studies: Rather than being exceptions to the poor olfactory identification and communication usually seen elsewhere, experts and cross‐cultural categorization are here taken to corroborate the existence of local conceptual spaces.
Keywords Categorization  Conceptual spaces  Cross‐cultural  Experts  Names  Olfaction
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/cogs.12930
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,132
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Weirdest People in the World?Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):61-83.
Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought.Peter Gärdenfors - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):180-181.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Localist Network Modelling in Psychology: Ho-Hum or Hm-M-M?Craig Leth-Steensen - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):484-485.
Localist Representations and Theoretical Clarity.Norman D. Cook - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):474-475.
Connectionist Modelling in Psychology: A Localist Manifesto.Mike Page - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):443-467.
Sticking to the Manifesto.Mike Page - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):496-505.
Some Cautionary Remarks on the “Localist Model” Concept.Richard M. Golden - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):478-478.
Localist Models Are Already Here.Stellan Ohlsson - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):486-487.
Smelling Matter.Benjamin D. Young - 2016 - Philosophical Psychology 29 (4):1-18.
What’s That Smell?Clare Batty - 2009 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (4):321-348.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-01-04

Total views
19 ( #564,414 of 2,454,690 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #98,457 of 2,454,690 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes