Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
7552493 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences | 2014 | 7 Pages |
Abstract
From the premise that our biology imposes cognitive constraints on our epistemic activities, a series of prominent authors-most notably Fodor, Chomsky and McGinn-have argued that we are cognitively closed to certain aspects and properties of the world. Cognitive constraints, they argue, entail cognitive closure. I argue that this is not the case. More precisely, I detect two unwarranted conflations at the core of arguments deriving closure from constraints. The first is a conflation of what I will refer to as 'representation' and 'object of representation'. The second confuses the cognitive scope of the assisted mind for that of the unassisted mind. Cognitive closure, I conclude, cannot be established from pointing out the (uncontroversial) existence of cognitive constraints.
Keywords
Related Topics
Life Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (General)
Authors
Michael Vlerick,