more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 17971

[filed under theme 18. Thought / D. Concepts / 4. Structure of Concepts / c. Classical concepts ]

Full Idea

The classical view of concepts explains hierarchical order, where categories form nested sets. But research shows that categories are often not transitive. Research shows that a seat is furniture, and a car seat is a seat, but it is not furniture.

Gist of Idea

Classical concepts are transitive hierarchies, but actual categories may be intransitive

Source

Gregory L. Murphy (The Big Book of Concepts [2004], Ch. 2)

Book Ref

Murphy,Gregory L.: 'The Big Book of Concepts' [MIT 2004], p.27


A Reaction

[compressed] Murphy adds that the nesting of definitions is classically used to match the nesting of hierarchies. This is a nice example of the neatness of the analytic philosopher breaking down when it meets the mess of the world.


The 24 ideas from Gregory L. Murphy

The classical definitional approach cannot distinguish typical and atypical category members [Murphy]
Classical concepts follow classical logic, but concepts in real life don't work that way [Murphy]
Classical concepts are transitive hierarchies, but actual categories may be intransitive [Murphy]
The classical core is meant to be the real concept, but actually seems unimportant [Murphy]
The theoretical and practical definitions for the classical view are very hard to find [Murphy]
The most popular theories of concepts are based on prototypes or exemplars [Murphy]
The exemplar view of concepts says 'dogs' is the set of dogs I remember [Murphy]
There is no 'ideal' bird or dog, and prototypes give no information about variability [Murphy]
Prototypes are unified representations of the entire category (rather than of members) [Murphy]
We do not learn concepts in isolation, but as an integrated part of broader knowledge [Murphy]
Concepts with familiar contents are easier to learn [Murphy]
Some knowledge is involved in instant use of categories, other knowledge in explanations [Murphy]
People categorise things consistent with their knowledge, even rejecting some good evidence [Murphy]
The prototype theory uses observed features, but can't include their construction [Murphy]
Induction is said to just compare properties of categories, but the type of property also matters [Murphy]
The main theories of concepts are exemplar, prototype and knowledge [Murphy]
Research shows perceptual discrimination is sharper at category boundaries [Murphy]
Children using knowing and essentialist categories doesn't fit the exemplar view [Murphy]
Exemplar theory struggles with hierarchical classification and with induction [Murphy]
Conceptual combination must be compositional, and can't be built up from exemplars [Murphy]
The concept of birds from exemplars must also be used in inductions about birds [Murphy]
The prototype theory handles hierarchical categories and combinations of concepts well [Murphy]
Prototypes theory of concepts is best, as a full description with weighted typical features [Murphy]
Learning concepts is forming prototypes with a knowledge structure [Murphy]