Making sense of conceptual change

History and Theory

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 351-372

  Kuukkanen, Jouni Matti ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61149494405     PISSN: 00182656     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00459.x     Document Type: Review

References (70)

1. An exception is Jaakko Hintikka, who has recently made clear his approval of Lovejoy's methodology, although he is skeptical about Lovejoy.'s implementation of it. See "Reply to Simo Knuuttila" and "Reply to Gabriel Motzkin," in The Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka, ed. Randal E. Auxer and Lewis Edwin Hahn (Chicago: Open Court, 2006), 106-113 and 132-136.
2. See also "Gaps in the Great Chain of Being: An Exercise in the Methodology of the History of Ideas," in Reforging the Great Chain of Being, ed. Simo Knuuttila (Dordcrecht: Reidel Publishing Company, 1981 ), 1-18;
3. and Moltke S.Gram and Richard Martin, "The Perils of Plenitude: Hintikka contra Lovejoy," Journal of the History of Ideas 49 (1980), 497-511.
4. Daniel Wilson, "Lovejoy's The Great Chain of Being after Fifty Years," Journal of the History of Ideas 48 (1987), 187.
5. Louis Mink, "Change and Causality in the History of Ideas," Eighteenth Century Studies 2 (1968), 9.
6. Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics, Vol. 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 176.
7. For example, Nancy Nersessian, "Faraday's Field Concept," in Faraday Rediscovered: Essays on the Life and Work of Michael Faraday, 1791-1867, ed. David Gooding and Frank A. J. L. James (Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Press, 1985), 377-406;
8. "How Do Scientists Think?" in Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change, ed. R. N. Giere (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992), 3-45;
9. and "Conceptual Change," in A Companion to Cognitive Science, ed. William Bechtel and George Graham (Maiden, MA: Blackwell, 1998), 155-166.
10. Donald R. Kelley, "What Is Happening to the History of Ideas?" Journal of the History of Ideas 51 (1990), 19.
11. Donald R. Kelley, The Descent of Ideas (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2002), 311.
12. Wilson, "Lovejoy's The Great Chain of Being after Fifty Years," 204.
13. Kelley, The Descent of Ideas, 310.
14. Mefvin Richter, "Begriffsgeschichte and the History of Ideas," Journal of the History of Ideas 48 (1987), 262.
15. However, see John Patrick Diggins, "Arthur O. Lovejoy and the Challenge of Intellectual History," Journal of the History of Ideas 67 (2006), 181-208, for a recent defense of this aspect.
16. Willard Van Orraan Quine, "Two Dogmas of Empiricism," in From a Logical Point of View (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961).
17. See Edward S. Smith and Douglas L. Medin, Categories and Concepts (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge, 1981), for a comprehensive study on the discussion of theories of concepts in cognitive psychology.
18. A classic authority providing evidence for the graded structure of concepts is Eleanor Rosch, who before 1973 published as E. R. Heider. See for example Heider, "Universals in Color Naming and Memory," Journal of Experimental Psychology 2 (1972), 10-20;
19. Rosch, "Natural Categories," Cognitive Psychology 4 (1973), 328-350;
20. idem, "On the Internal Structure of Perceptual and Semantic Categories," in Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, ed. T. E. Moore (New York: Academic Press), 111-144;
21. and Rosch and C. B. Mervis, "Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structures of Categories," Cognitive Psychology 7 (1975), 573-605. See also the discussion on the cognitive HPS below.
22. Nersessian, "Faraday's Field Concept," 175.
23. Nancy Nersessian, "Discussion: The Method to 'Meaning': A Reply to Leplin," Philosophy of Science 5 (1991), 680.
24. Nersessian, "Conceptual Change," 160;
25. idem, Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1984).
26. Nersessian, "How Do Scientists Think?," 8.
27. Richter, "Begriffsgeschichte";
28. similarly, idem, The History of Political and Social Concepts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 21.
29. Quentin Skinner, "Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas," History and Theory 8(1969), 11-12.
30. Skinner, "Meaning and Understanding," 11, 27-28.
31. Mark Bevir, "Begriffsgeschichte" History and Theory 39 (2000), 279-280.
32. Bevir, The Logic of the History of Ideas (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 76; ray emphasis.
33. Skinner, "Meaning and Understanding," 36-38.
34. Skinner, Visions of Politics, 86.
35. Lovejoy was well aware of the distinction between linguistic entities, such as words and sentences, and non-linguistic entities, such as ideas. Cf. Lovejoy, Essays in the History of Ideas, (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1948), xiii;
36. idem, "Reply to Professor Spitzer," Journal of the History of Ideas 5 (1944), 217 and 214;
37. see also Lovejoy, "The Meaning of Romanticism for the History of Ideas," Journal of the History of Ideas 3 (1941), 257-278.
38. Melvin Richter, "Reconstructing the History of Political Languages: Pocock, Skinner, and the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe," History and Theory 29 (1990), 55.
39. Cf. Arthur O. Lovejoy, "Reflections on the History of Ideas," Journal of the History of Ideas 1 (1940), 3.
40. For example, see Paul Thagard, Conceptual Revolutions (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 21-24.
41. Cf. Kelley, "What Is Happening to the History of Ideas?" 23-24.
42. Smith and Medin, Categories and Concepts, 1.
43. Lovejoy, "Reply to Professor Spitzer," 204.
44. Kenneth Minogue, "Method in Intellectual History: Quentin Skinner's Foundations," in Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics, ed. James Tully (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 186.
45. For example, Ernest LePore and Jerry Fodor, Holism: A Shopper's Guide (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 2004);
46. Ned Block, "Holism, Mental and Semantic," in The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (London: Routledge, 1998), IV, 488-493.
47. Diggins, "Arthur O. Lovejoy and the Challenge of Intellectual History," 185.
48. Minogue, "Method in Intellectual History," 184-185.
49. Simo Knuuttila, "Hintikka's View of the History of Philosophy," in Auxer and Hahn, eds., The Philosophy of Jaakko Hintikka, 96-97.
50. Nils Bjorn Kvastad, "On Method in the History of Ideas," International Logic Review 9 (1979), 96-410.
51. Gram and Martin, "The Perils of Plenitude."
52. Gad Prudovsky, "Can We Ascribe to Past Thinkers Concepts They Had No Linguistic Means to Express?" History and Theory 36 (1997), 15-31.
53. Thomas Bredsdorff, "Lovejoy's Idea of 'idea'," New Literary History 8 (1977), 195-211.
54. Mink, "Change and Causality."
55. Richter, The History of Political and Social Concepts, 21.
56. For example, Nersessian, Faraday to Einstein.
57. See Hanne Andersen, "Kuhn's Account of Family Resemblance: A Solution to the Problem of Wide-open Texture," Erkenntnis 52 (2000), 313-337.
58. This is suggested by Nersessian and earlier by Dudley Shapere, who talk about "chains of reasoning" connecting consecutive ideas or concepts. See Nersessian, "The Method to 'Meaning'," Philosophy of Science 58 (1991), 678-686;
59. idem, Faraday to Einstein;
60. Dudley Shapere, "Reason, Reference and the Quest for Knowledge," Philosophy of Science 49 (1982), 1-23;
61. idem, "Reasons, Radical Change and Incommensurability in Science," in Incommensurability and Related Matters, ed. Howard Sankey and Paul Hoyningen-Huene (Boston: Kluwer, 2001), 181-206.
62. Lavoisier replaced the last feature by a conditional definition. He did not understand elements as the ultimate constituents, but as constituents composable-so-far, that is, components that one had been able to divide with the material means available. See Antoine Lavoisier, Method of Chymical Nomenclature, published with Antoine-François de Fourceau, Guyton de Morveau, and Claude-Louis Berthollet, transi. James St. John ("London: G. Kearley, 1788), 12;
63. Lavoisier, Elements of Chemistry, transi. Robert Kerr (Edinburgh: William Creech, 1790), xxii;
64. Robert Siegfried, From Elements to Atoms: A History of Chemical Composition (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 2002).
65. Lovejoy, Essays in the History of Ideas, xii.
66. Arthur O. Lovejoy and George Boas, Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity (New York: Octagon Books, 1980), 1-23.
67. Nils B. Kvastad, "Semantics in the Methodology of the History of Ideas," Journal of the History of Ideas 38 (1977), 158;
68. Philip P. Wiener, "Some Problems and Methods in the History of Ideas," Journal of the History of Ideas 22 (1961), 533.
69. George Boas, "Some Problems of Intellectual History," in Studies in Intellectual History, ed. George Boas et al. (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1953), 15.
70. Christopher Peacocke, A Study of Concepts (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992), 3.