Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 3
  • Print publication year: 2005
  • Online publication date: July 2009

12 - Connecting Concepts to Each Other and the World

Summary

Consider two individuals, John and Mary, who each possess a number of concepts. How can we determine that John and Mary both have a concept of, say, Horse? John and Mary may not have exactly the same knowledge of horses, but it is important to be able to place their horse concepts into correspondence with one another, if only so that we can say things like, “Mary's concept of horse is much more sophisticated than John's.” Concepts should be public in the sense that they can be possessed by more than one person (Fodor, 1998; Fodor & Lepore, 1992), and for this to be the possible, we must be able to determine correspondences, or translations, between two individuals' concepts.

There have been two major approaches in cognitive science to conceptual meaning that could potentially provide a solution to finding translations between conceptual systems. According to an “external grounding” account, concepts' meanings depend on their connection to the external world (this account is more thoroughly defined in the next section). By this account, the concept Horse means what it does because our perceptual apparatus can identify features that characterize horses. According to what we will call a “Conceptual web” account, concepts' meanings depend on their connections to each other. By this account, Horse's meaning depends on Gallop, Domesticated, and Quadruped, and in turn, these concepts depend on other concepts, including Horse (Quine & Ullian, 1970).

References
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 577–660
Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7, 84–91
Block, N. (1986). Advertisement for a semantics for psychology. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 10, 615–78
Block, N. (1999). Functional role semantics. In R. A. Wilson, & F. C. Keil (Eds.), MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (pp. 331–332). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition 75, 1–28
Boroditsky, L., & Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science 13, 185–189
Burgess, C., Livesay, K., & Lund, K. (1998). Explorations in context space: Words, sentences, and discourse. Discourse Processes 25, 211–257
Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (2000). The dynamics of meaning in memory. In E. Diettrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive Dynamics: Conceptual Change in Humans and Machines (pp. 117–156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Carey, S. (1999). Knowledge acquisition: Enrichment or conceptual change. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core Readings (pp. 459–487). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Carroll, J. D., & Chang, J. J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition. Psychometrika 35, 283–319
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic priming. Psychological Review 82, 407–428
Edelman, S. (1999). Representation and Recognition in Vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Eliasmith, C., & Thagard, P. (2001). Integrating structure and meaning: A distributed model of analogical mapping. Cognitive Science 25, 245–286
Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence 41, 1–63
Feng, Y., Goldstone, R. L., & Menkov, V. (2004). ABSURDIST II: A Graph Matching Algorithm and its Application to Conceptual System Translation. FLAIRS 2004
Field, H. (1977). Logic, meaning, and conceptual role. Journal of Philosophy 74, 379–409
Fodor, J. (1998). Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. Oxford: Clarendon Press
Fodor, J., & Lepore, E. (1992). Holism. Oxford: Blackwell
Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity. Psychological Science 5, 148–152
Gentner, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, 558–565
Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson, D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language 43, 379–401
Goldstone, R. L. (1994). Similarity, Interactive Activation, and Mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20, 3–28
Goldstone, R. L. (1996). Isolated and Interrelated Concepts. Memory and Cognition 24, 608–628
Goldstone, R. L. (2003). Learning to perceive while perceiving to learn. In R. Kimchi, M. Behrmann & C. Olson (Eds.), Perceptual Organization in Vision: Behavioral and Neural Perspectives (pp. 233–278). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Goldstone, R. L., & Barsalou, L. (1998). Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition 65, 231–262
Goldstone, R. L., Lippa, Y., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2001). Altering object representations through category learning. Cognition 78, 27–43
Goldstone, R. L., & Rogosky, B. J. (2002). Using relations within conceptual systems to translate across conceptual systems. Cognition 84, 295–320
Goldstone, R. L., Steyvers, M., & Rogosky, B. J. (2003). Conceptual Interrelatedness and Caricatures. Memory and Cognition 31, 169–180
Goldstone, R. L., Steyvers, M., Spencer-Smith, J., & Kersten, A. (2000). Interactions between perceptual and conceptual learning. In E. Diettrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive Dynamics: Conceptual Change in Humans and Machines (pp. 191–228). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D 42, 335–346
Hofstadter, D. (1995). Fluid concepts and creative analogies. New York: Basic Books
Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science 13, 295–355
Hume, D. (1740/1973). An Abstract of a Treatise on Human Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review 104, 427–466
Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (2003). A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. Psychological Review 110, 220–264
Kohonen, T. (1995). Self-Organizing Maps. Berlin: Springer-Verlag
Kuhn. T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Laakso, A., & Cottrell, G. (1998). “How can I know what you think?”: Assessing representational similarity in neural systems. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Cognitive Science Conference. Madison, WI: Lawrence Erlbaum (pp. 591–596)
Laakso, A., & Cottrell, G. (2000). Content and cluster analysis: Assessing representational similarity in neural systems. Philosophical Psychology 13, 47–76
Lakoff, G., & Nunez, R. E. (2000). Where Mathematics Comes From: How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being. New York: Basic Books
Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 104, 211–240
Larkey, L. B., & Love, B. C. (2003). CAB: Connectionist analogy builder. Cognitive Science 27, 781–794
Lenat, D. B., & Feigenbaum, E. A. (1991). On the thresholds of knowledge. Artificial Intelligence 47, 185–250
Locke, J. (1690). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. (http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/Projects/digitexts/locke/understanding/title.html)
Markman, A. B. (1996). Structural alignment in similarity and difference judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 3, 227–230
Markman, A. B., Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology 113, 501–538
Marr, D., & Poggio, T. (1979). A computational theory of human stereo vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 204, 301–328
Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1990). Similarity involving attributes and relations: Judgments of similarity and difference are not inverses. Psychological Science 1, 64–69
Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for similarity. Psychological Review 100, 254–278
Melnik, S., Molina-Garcia, H., & Rahm, E. (2002). Similarity flooding: A versatile graph matching algorithm and its application to schema matching. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) (pp. 117–128)
Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying properties from different modalities for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science 14, 119–124
Prinz, J. (2002). Furnishing the Mind: Concepts and Their Perceptual Basis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Putnam, H. (1973). Meaning and reference. The Journal of Philosophy 70, 699–711
Quillian, M. R. (1967). Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science 12, 410–430
Quine, W. V., & Ullian, J. S. (1970). The Web of Belief. New York: McGraw-Hill
Rapaport, W. J. (2002). Holism, conceptual-role semantics, and syntactic semantics. Minds and Machines 12, 3–59
Regier, T. (1996). The Human Semantic Potential: Spatial Language and Constrained Connectionism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Regier, T., & Carlson, L. A. (2001). Grounding spatial language in perception: An empirical and computational investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 130, 273–298
Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., & McRae, K. (2003). Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science 27, 767–780
Rumelhart, D. E., Smolensky, P., McClelland, J. L., & Hinton, G. E. (1986). Schemata and sequential thought processes in PDP models. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Volume 2 (pp. 7–57). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Rumelhart, D. E., & Zipser, D. (1985). Feature discovery by competitive learning. Cognitive Science 9, 75–112
Saussure, F. (1915/1959). Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill
Schyns, P. G., Goldstone, R. L., & Thibaut, J. (1998). Development of features in object concepts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21, 1–54
Shepard, R. N., & Cooper, L. A. (1986). Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Simmons, K., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). The similarity-in-topography principle: Reconciling theories of conceptual deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology 20, 451–486
Smith, C., Carey, S., & Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition 21, 177–237
Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science 12, 153–156
Stich, S. P. (1983). From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science: The Case Against Belief. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Ullman, S. (1979). The interpretation of visual motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Ullman, S. (1989). Aligning pictorial descriptions: An approach to object recognition. Cognition 32, 193–254
Ullman, S. (1996). High-Level Vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shape of objects. Psychological Science 13, 168–171