Abstract
Traditionally, theories of concepts in psychology assume that concepts are a single, uniform kind of mental representation. But no single kind of representation can explain all of the empirical data for which concepts are responsible. I argue that the assumption that concepts are uniformly the same kind of mental structure is responsible for these theories’ shortcomings, and outline a pluralist theory of concepts that rejects this assumption. On pluralism, concepts should be thought of as being constituted by multiple representational kinds, with the particular kind of concept used on an occasion being determined by the context. I argue that endorsing pluralism does not lead to eliminativism about concepts as an object of scientific interest.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ahn W. and Dennis M.J. (2001). Dissociation between categorization and similarity judgment: Differential effect of causal status on feature weights. In: Hahn, U. and Ramscar, M. (eds) Similarity and categorization, pp 87–107. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ahn W. and Kim N.S. (2001). The causal status effect in categorization: An overview. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation 40: 23–63
Ahn W., Kim N.S., Lassaline M.E. and Dennis M.J. (2000). Causal status as a determinant of feature centrality. Cognitive Psychology 41: 361–416
Anderson J.R. and Betz J. (2001). A hybrid model of categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8: 629–647
Bailenson J.N., Shum M.S., Atran S., Medin D.L. and Coley J.D. (2002). A bird’s eye view: Biological categorization and reasoning within and across cultures. Cognition 84: 1–53
Barsalou L.W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 11: 211–227
Barsalou L.W. (1985). Ideals, central tendency and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11: 629–649
Barsalou L.W. (1987). The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In: Neisser, U. (eds) Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization, pp 101–140. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Biederman I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review 94: 115–147
Block N. (1997). Anti-reductionism slaps back. Philosophical Perspectives 11: 107–133
Boster J.S. and Johnson J.C. (1989). Form or function: A comparison of expert and novice judgments of similarity among fish. American Anthropologist 91: 866–889
Boyd R. (1991). Realism, anti-foundationalism and the enthusiasm for natural kinds. Philosophical Studies 61: 127–148
Brooks L.R. (1987). Decentralized control of categorization: The role of prior processing episodes. In: Neisser, U. (eds) Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization, pp 141–174. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Burnett R.C., Medin D.L., Ross N.O. and Blok S.V. (2005). Ideal is typical. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 59: 3–10
Costello F.J. and Keane M.T. (2000). Efficient creativity: Constraint-guided conceptual combination. Cognitive Science 24: 299–349
Craver C.F. (2004). Dissociable realization and kind splitting. Philosophy of Science 71: 960–971
Dehaene S. (1997). The number sense. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Estes W.K. (1994). Classification and cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Estes Z. (2003). Domain differences in the structure of artifactual and natural categories. Memory and Cognition 31: 199–214
Fodor J.A. (1994). Concepts: A potboiler. Cognition 50: 95–113
Fodor J.A. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Fodor J.A. and Lepore E. (2002). The compositionality papers. Oxford University Press, Oxford
FodorJ.A. Pylyshyn Z. (1988). Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture. Cognition 28: 3–71
Gelman S.A. (2003). The essential child. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Gentner D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7: 155–170
Gentner D. (2003). Why we’re so smart. In: Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds) Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought, pp 195–236. MIT Press, Cambridge
Gentner D. and Namy L.L. (1999). Comparison in the development of categories. Cognitive Development 14: 487–513
Gentner D. and Markman A.B. (1997). Structure-mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist 52: 45–56
Hacking I. (1991). A tradition of natural kinds. Philosophical Studies 61: 109–126
Hampton J.A. (1995). Similarity-based categorization: The development of prototype theory. Psychologica Belgica 35: 103–125
Hirschfeld L.A. and Gelman S.A. (1994). Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Johnson K.E. (2001). Impact of varying levels of expertise on decisions of category typicality. Memory and Cognition 29: 1036–1050
Juslin P., Jones S., Olsson H. and Winman A. (2003). Cue abstraction and exemplar memory in categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29: 924–941
Keil F.C. (1989). Concepts, kinds and cognitive development. MIT Press, Cambridge
Keil F.C. (1994). The birth and nurturance of concepts by domains: The origins of concepts of living things. In: Hirschfeld, L.A. and Gelman, S.A. (eds) Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture, pp. Cambridge University Press, New York
Keil F.C., Smith W.C., Simons D.J. and Levin D.T. (1998). Two dogmas of conceptual empiricism: Implications for hybrid models of the structure of knowledge. Cognition 65: 103–135
Kim J. (1992). Multiple realization and the metaphysics of reduction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52: 1–26
Komatsu L.K. (1992). Recent views of conceptual structure. Psychological Bulletin 112: 500–526
Kunda Z., Miller D.T. and Claire T. (1990). Combining social categories: The role of causal reasoning. Cognitive Science 14: 551–577
Lakoff G. (1987). Cognitive models and prototype theory. In: Neisser, U. (eds) Concepts and conceptual development, pp 63–100. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Laurence S. and Margolis E. (1999). Concepts and cognitive science. In: Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. (eds) Concepts: Core readings, pp 3–81. MIT Press, Cambridge
Lynch E.B., Coley J.D. and Medin D.L. (2000). Tall is typical: Central tendency, ideal dimensions, and graded category structure among tree experts and novices. Memory and Cognition 28: 41–50
Machery E. (2005). Concepts are not a natural kind. Philosophy of Science 72: 444–465
Machery E. (2006). How to split concepts: A reply to Piccinini and Scott. Philosophy of Science 73: 410–418
Malt B.C. (1989). An on-line investigation of prototype and exemplar strategies in classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 15: 539–555
Malt B.C., Sloman S.A., Gennari S., Shi M. and Wang Y. (1999). Knowing versus naming: Similarity and the linguistic categorization of artifacts. Journal of Memory and Language 40: 230–262
Markman A.B. (2001). Structural alignment, similarity and the internal structure of category representations. In: Hahn, U. and Ramscar, M. (eds) Similarity and categorization, pp 109–130. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Markman A.B. and Ross B.H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin 129: 592–613
Marr D. (1982). Vision. W. H. Freeman, New York
Marr D. and Nishihara H.K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 200: 269–294
Medin D.L. and Atran S. (1999). Folkbiology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Medin D.L., Lynch E.B., Coley J.D. and Atran S. (1997). Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: Do all roads lead to Rome?. Cognitive Psychology 32: 49–96
Medin D.L., Lynch E.B. and Solomon K.O. (2000). Are there kinds of concepts?. Annual Review of Psychology 51: 121–147
Millikan R.G. (1998). A common structure for concepts of individuals, stuffs and basic kinds: More mama, more milk, and more mouse. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 55–65
Medin D.L. and Schaffer M.M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 85: 207–238
Millikan R.G. (1999). Historical kinds and the “special sciences”. Philosophical Studies 95: 45–65
Millikan R.G. (2000). On clear and confused ideas: An essay about substance concepts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Murphy G.L. (2002). The big book of concepts. MIT Press, Cambridge
Murphy G.L. and Medin D.L. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92: 289–316
Nosofsky R.M. (1986). Attention, similarity and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115: 39–57
Nosofsky R.M. (1988). Exemplar-based accounts of relations between classification, recognition and typicality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 14: 700–708
Nosofsky R.M. (1991). Tests of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 17: 3–27
Opfer J.E. and Siegler R.S. (2004). Revisiting preschoolers living thing concept: A microgenetic analysis of conceptual change in basic biology. Cognitive Psychology 49: 301–332
Osherson D.N. and Smith E.E. (1981). On the adequacy of prototype theory as a theory of concepts. Cognition 9: 35–58
Palmeri T.J. and Gauthier I. (2004). Visual object understanding. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5: 291–304
Piccinini G. and Scott S. (2006). Splitting concepts. Philosophy of Science 73: 390–409
Poggio T. and Edelman S. (1990). A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature 343: 263–266
Poling D.A. and Evans E.M. (2002). Why do birds of a feather flock together?. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 20: 89–112
Prinz J.J. (2002). Furnishing the mind. MIT Press, Cambridge
Putnam, H. (1970). Is semantics possible? In H. Putnam (Ed.), Mind, language, and reality: Philosophical papers (Vol. 2, pp. 139–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ratneshwar S., Barsalou L.W., Pechmann C. and Moore M. (2001). Goal-derived categories: The role of personal and situational goals in category representation. Journal of Consumer Psychology 10: 147–157
Rehder B. (2003). A causal-model theory of conceptual representation and categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 29: 1141–1159
Rehder B. and Burnett R.C. (2005). Feature inference and the causal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 50: 264–314
Rips L.J. (1989). Similarity, typicality and categorization. In: Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A. (eds) Similarity and analogical reasoning, pp 21–59. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rips L.J. (1995). The current status of research on concept combination. Mind and Language 10: 72–104
Rips L.J., Shoben E.J. and Smith E.E. (1973). Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12: 1–20
Robbins P. (2002). How to blunt the sword of compositionality. Nous 36: 313–334
Rosch E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In: Rosch, E. and Lloyd, B.B. (eds) Cognition and categorization, pp 27–48. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
Rosch E. and Mervis C.B. (1975). Family resemblance: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605
Sloman S.A., Love B.C. and Ahn W. (1998). Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science 22: 189–228
Smith E.E. and Medin D.L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Smith J.D. and Minda J.P. (2000). Thirty categorization results in search of a model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 26: 3–27
Smith E.E., Shoben E.J. and Rips L.J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions. Psychological Review 81: 214–241
Tarr M.J. (2003). Visual object recognition: Can a single mechanism suffice?. In: Peterson, M.A. and Rhodes, G. (eds) Perception of faces, objects and scenes: Analytic and holistic processes, pp 177–211. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK
Tarr M.J. and Bülthoff H.H. (1998). Image-based object recognition in man, monkey and machine. Cognition 67: 1–20
Weiskopf D.A. (2007). Concept empiricism and the vehicles of thought. Journal of Consciousness Studies 14: 156–183
Weiskopf, D. A. (forthcoming a). Atomism, pluralism, and conceptual content. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
Weiskopf, D. A. (forthcoming b). First thoughts. Philosophical Psychology.
Whittlesea B.W.A., Brooks L.R. and Westcott C. (1994). After the learning is over: Factors controlling the selective application of general and particular knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20: 259–274
Yamauchi T. and Markman A.B. (1998). Category learning by inference and classification. Journal of Memory and Language 39: 124–148
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Weiskopf, D.A. The plurality of concepts. Synthese 169, 145–173 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9340-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9340-8