Where Does Cardinality Come From?

IF 1.8 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Review of Philosophy and Psychology Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1007/s13164-024-00746-9
Markus Pantsar, Bahram Assadian
{"title":"Where Does Cardinality Come From?","authors":"Markus Pantsar, Bahram Assadian","doi":"10.1007/s13164-024-00746-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>How do we acquire the notions of cardinality and cardinal number? In the (neo-)Fregean approach, they are derived from the notion of equinumerosity. According to some alternative approaches, defended and developed by Husserl and Parsons among others, the order of explanation is reversed: equinumerosity is explained in terms of cardinality, which, in turn, is explained in terms of our ordinary practices of counting. In their paper, ‘Cardinality, Counting, and Equinumerosity’, Richard Kimberly Heck proposes that instead of equinumerosity or counting, cardinality is derived from a cognitively earlier notion of <i>just as many</i>. In this paper, we assess Heck’s proposal in terms of contemporary theories of number concept acquisition. Focusing on bootstrapping theories, we argue that there is no evidence that the notion of <i>just as many</i> is cognitively primary. Furthermore, since the acquisition of cardinality is an enculturated process, the cognitive primariness of these notions, possibly including <i>just as many</i>, depends on various external cultural factors. Therefore, being possibly a cultural construction, <i>just as many</i> could be one among several notions used in the acquisition of cardinality and cardinal number concepts. This paper thus challenges those accounts which seek for a fundamental concept underlying all aspects of numerical cognition.</p>","PeriodicalId":47055,"journal":{"name":"Review of Philosophy and Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Philosophy and Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-024-00746-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How do we acquire the notions of cardinality and cardinal number? In the (neo-)Fregean approach, they are derived from the notion of equinumerosity. According to some alternative approaches, defended and developed by Husserl and Parsons among others, the order of explanation is reversed: equinumerosity is explained in terms of cardinality, which, in turn, is explained in terms of our ordinary practices of counting. In their paper, ‘Cardinality, Counting, and Equinumerosity’, Richard Kimberly Heck proposes that instead of equinumerosity or counting, cardinality is derived from a cognitively earlier notion of just as many. In this paper, we assess Heck’s proposal in terms of contemporary theories of number concept acquisition. Focusing on bootstrapping theories, we argue that there is no evidence that the notion of just as many is cognitively primary. Furthermore, since the acquisition of cardinality is an enculturated process, the cognitive primariness of these notions, possibly including just as many, depends on various external cultural factors. Therefore, being possibly a cultural construction, just as many could be one among several notions used in the acquisition of cardinality and cardinal number concepts. This paper thus challenges those accounts which seek for a fundamental concept underlying all aspects of numerical cognition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卡性从何而来?
我们如何获得 "万有引力 "和 "万有引力数 "的概念?按照(新)弗雷格的方法,它们是从等差数列的概念中衍生出来的。根据胡塞尔和帕森斯等人所捍卫和发展的另一种方法,解释的顺序是相反的:等数性是根据万有性来解释的,而万有性又是根据我们普通的计数实践来解释的。理查德-金伯利-赫克(Richard Kimberly Heck)在其论文《万国牌、计数和等数性》中提出,万国牌不是等数性或计数,而是源自认知上更早的 "一样多 "概念。在本文中,我们将从当代数字概念习得理论的角度来评估赫克的提议。以引导理论为重点,我们认为没有证据表明 "一样多 "的概念在认知上是首要的。此外,由于 "万有引力 "的习得是一个文化熏陶的过程,这些概念(可能包括 "一样多")的认知首要性取决于各种外部文化因素。因此,"一样多 "可能是一种文化建构,它可能是在习得万有引力和万有引力数概念时使用的几个概念中的一个。因此,本文对那些寻求数字认知所有方面的基本概念的说法提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Philosophy and Psychology
Review of Philosophy and Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: The Review of Philosophy and Psychology is a peer-reviewed journal focusing on philosophical and foundational issues in cognitive science. The aim of the journal is to provide a forum for discussion on topics of mutual interest to philosophers and psychologists and to foster interdisciplinary research at the crossroads of philosophy and the sciences of the mind, including the neural, behavioural and social sciences. The journal publishes theoretical works grounded in empirical research as well as empirical articles on issues of philosophical relevance. It includes thematic issues featuring invited contributions from leading authors together with articles answering a call for papers. The Review of Philosophy and Psychology is published quarterly and is hosted at the Jean Nicod Institute, a research centre of the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. It was formerly published as the "European Review of Philosophy" by CSLI Publications, Stanford.
期刊最新文献
Transitive Inference over Affective Representations in Non-Human Animals Self-Deception: A Case Study in Folk Conceptual Structure Philosophy for Preschoolers? A Critical Review to Promote informed Implementation of P4C in Preschools Where Does Cardinality Come From? Collaborative Inhibition: A Phenomenological Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1