Stone tools and conceptual structure

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (1):202-203 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Understanding how conceptual structures inform stone tool production and use would help us resolve the issue of a pongid-hominid dichotomy in brain organisation and cognitive ability. Evidence from ideational apraxia suggests that the planning of linguistic and manipulative behaviours is not colocalized in homologous circuits. An alternative account in terms of the evolutionary expansion of the whole prefrontal-premotor area may be more plausible

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 80,001

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Artifacts and cognition: Evolution or cultural progress?Bruce Bridgeman - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (3):403-403.
Brains evolution and neurolinguistic preconditions.Wendy K. Wilkins & Jennie Wakefield - 1995 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (1):161-182.
Is symmetry of stone tools merely an epiphenomenon of similarity?J. B. Derēgowski - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (3):406-407.
People, Tools, and Agency: Who Is the Kybernetes?H. F. J. Müller - 2005 - Constructivist Foundations 1 (1):35--48.
Thinking and doing in cognitive archaeology: Giving skill its due.Dietrich Stout - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (3):421-422.
A view from cognitive linguistics.Ronald W. Langacker - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):625-625.
Kuhn, incommensurability, and cognitive science.Peter Barker - 2001 - Perspectives on Science 9 (4):433-462.
Semantic Structures.Ray S. Jackendoff - 1990 - Cambridge: MIT Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-21

Downloads
16 (#687,397)

6 months
1 (#478,598)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations