Concepts, Perception and the Dual Process Theories of Mind

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In this article we argue that the problem of the relationships between concepts and perception in cognitive science is blurred by the fact that the very notion of concept is rather confused. Since it is not always clear exactly what concepts are, it is not easy to say, for example, whether and in what measure concept possession involves entertaining and manipulating perceptual representations, whether concepts are entirely different from perceptual representations, and so on. As a paradigmatic example of this state of affairs, we will start by taking into consideration the distinction between conceptual and nonconceptual content. The analysis of such a distinction will lead us to the conclusion that concept is a heterogeneous notion. Then we shall take into account the so called dual process theories of mind; this approach also points to concepts being a heterogeneous phenomenon: different aspects of conceptual competence are likely to be ascribed to different types of systems. We conclude that without a clear specification of what concepts are, the problem of the relationships between concepts and perception is somewhat ill-posed.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2014-10-25
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Big Book of Concepts.Murphy, Gregory L.
Mind and World.Price, Huw & McDowell, John
The Varieties of Reference.Antony, Louise M.; Evans, Gareth & McDowell, John

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
200 ( #14,406 of 39,583 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
39 ( #12,330 of 39,583 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.