Induction from a Single Instance: Incomplete Frames
- 412 Downloads
In this paper we argue that an existing theory of concepts called dynamic frame theory, although not developed with that purpose in mind, allows for the precise formulation of a number of problems associated with induction from a single instance. A key role is played by the distinction we introduce between complete and incomplete dynamic frames, for incomplete frames seem to be very elegant candidates for the format of the background knowledge used in induction from a single instance. Furthermore, we show how dynamic frame theory provides the terminology to discuss the justification and the fallibility of incomplete frames. In the Appendix, we give a formal account of incomplete frames and the way these lead to induction from a single instance.
KeywordsConcepts Dynamic frames Single instance induction Induction
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
- Barsalou L. (1987) The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In: Neisser U. (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 101–140Google Scholar
- Barsalou L. (1993) Concepts and meaning. In: Barsalou L., Yeh W., Luka B., Olseth K., Mix K., Wu L. (eds) Chicago Linguistic Society 29: Papers from the parasession on conceptual representations. University of Chicago, Chicago, pp 23–61Google Scholar
- Barsalou L., Hale C. (1993) Components of conceptual representation from feature lists to recursive frames. In: Van Mechelen I., Hampton J., Michalski R., Theuns P. (eds) Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis. Academic Press, New York, pp 97–144Google Scholar
- Batens D., Haesaert L. (2003) On classical adaptive logics of induction. Logique et Analyse 46: 225–290Google Scholar
- Davies, T. (1988). Determination, uniformity, and relevance: Normative criteria for generalization and reasoning by analogy. In Analogical reasoning (pp. 227–250). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
- Fodor J., Garrett M., Walker E., Parkes C. (1999) Against definitions. In Concepts: Core readings. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Goodman N. (1978) Fact, fiction and forecast. The Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
- Kuhn T. (1974) Second thoughts on paradigms. In: Suppe F. (Ed.), The structure of scientific theories. University of Illinois Press, Champaign, pp 459–482Google Scholar
- Mill J. (1973) A system of logic: Ratiocinative and inductive. University of Toronto press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
- Rosch E. (1978) Principles of categorization. In: Rosch E., Lloyd B. (eds) Cognition and categorization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 27–48Google Scholar
- Rosch E. (1983) Prototype classification and logical classification the two systems. In: Scholnick E. (Ed.), New trends in cognitive representation. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 73–86Google Scholar
- Rosch E. H. (1973) On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In: Moore T. E. (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. Academic, Dublin, pp 111–144Google Scholar
- Steel D. (2008) Across the boundaries extrapolation in biology and the social sciences. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Vickers, J. (2010). The problem of induction. In: E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Fall 2010 edition.Google Scholar
- Wittgenstein L. (1953) Philosophical investigations. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.