Breaking the language barrier: conceptual representation without a language-like format

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An important part of the explanatory role of concepts is that they enable us to combine a wide variety of objects, properties and relations in thought, with contents spanning diverse domains. I discuss an argument that appears to show that paradigmatic non-linguistic representational formats are unsuited to play this role, and thus conceptual representation could not occur in these formats. I show that this argument fails, because it overlooks the possibility of individual concepts being shared between a number of special purpose representational systems. Demonstrating this requires defending the possibility of cross-format redeployment of concepts.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,296

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-03-29

Downloads
42 (#390,669)

6 months
42 (#98,106)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Iwan Williams
Monash University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Advertisement for a Semantics for Psychology.Ned Block - 1986 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 10 (1):615-678.
The Varieties of Reference.Gareth Evans & John Mcdowell - 1986 - Philosophy 61 (238):534-538.
Cognitive maps in rats and men.Edward C. Tolman - 1948 - Psychological Review 55 (4):189-208.
Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation.Stephen Palmer - 1978 - In Eleanor Rosch & Barbara Bloom Lloyd (eds.), Cognition and Categorization. Lawrence Elbaum Associates. pp. 259-303.

View all 45 references / Add more references