A reassessment of the shift from the classical theory of concepts to prototype theory

Cognition 51 (1):73-89 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A standard view within psychology is that there have been two important shifts in the study of concepts and that each has led to some improvements. The first shift was from the classical theory of concepts to probabilistic theories, including the prototype theory. The second shift was from probabilistic theories to theory-based theories. In this article, I critically evaluate the view that the first shift was a major advance and argue that the prototype theory suffers some of the same problems that have been thought to challenge the classical theory.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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
2014-01-20

Downloads
167 (#247,191)

6 months
20 (#548,008)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eric Margolis
University of British Columbia

Citations of this work

Concepts and Cognitive Science.Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis - 1999 - In Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence, Concepts: Core Readings. MIT Press. pp. 3-81.
How to acquire a concept.Eric Margolis - 1998 - Mind and Language 13 (3):347-369.
Logical Concepts and Associative Characterizations.Elisabeth Camp - 2015 - In Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence, The Conceptual Mind: New Directions in the Study of Concepts. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. pp. 591-621.
Concepts are not a natural kind.Edouard Machery - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (3):444-467.

View all 19 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The meaning of 'meaning'.Hilary Putnam - 1975 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:131-193.
Naming and Necessity.S. Kripke - 1972 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (4):665-666.

View all 24 references / Add more references