Abstract
Concepts are fundamental collective constructs of individual items that are capable of abstracting meaningfully homogeneous groupings of phenomena. This capability is a prerequisite for communication and action and gives structure to learning and memory. Our study is aligned with the vast paradigm that assumes embodied cognition, rooted in Merleau-Ponty (Phenomenology of perception (trans: C. Smith). Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1962), seminally articulated by Varela et al. (Embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991) and existing today in a number of variants that have been reviewed by Wilson (Six views of embodied cognition. Springer. Psychon Bull Rev 9(4):625–636, 2002). We argue that the faculty to conceptualise may spring from the ability of homo habilis to manage concrete actions in space and time, and we propose that at the root level, ‘grasping concepts’ in a cognitive perspective may have a lot to do with the process of ‘grasping objects’ from an operational position.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Such clusters are also convex by nature, fulfilling the condition Gärdenfors stipulates (2000).
References
Baghramian, M. (2004). Relativism. London/New York: Routledge.
Bastille, A. Photograph of a lumberjack. Public domain, NARA record: 1422473, Wikimedia Commons.
Cazeaux, C. (2017). Art, research, philosophy. London: Taylor & Francis.
Dawson, M. R. W. (2013). Mind, body, world: Foundations of cognitive science. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.
Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. New York: Minton, Balch & Co.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic, the theory of inquiry. New York: Henry Holt.
Estivill-Castro, V. (2002). Why so many clustering algorithms — A position paper. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter.
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Taylor & Francis. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 455–479.
Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual spaces: On the geometry of thought. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Gärdenfors, P. (2011). Semantics based on conceptual spaces. In Logic and its applications (pp. 1–11).
Hautamäki, A. (1986). Points of view and their logical analysis. Helsinki: Acta Philosophica Fennica.
Hautamäki, A. (2015). Change, event, and temporal points of view. In M. V. Campos & A. M. L. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Temporal points of view, subjective and objective aspects (pp. 197–221). Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht/London: Springer.
Hautamäki, A. (2016). Points of view: A conceptual space approach. Foundations of Science, 21(3), 493–510.
Kaipainen, M., Normak, P., Niglas, K., Kippar, J., & Laanpere, M. (2008). Soft ontologies, spatial representations and multi-perspective explorability. Expert Systems, 25(5), 474–483.
Kaipainen, M., & Hautamäki, A. (2011). Epistemic pluralism and multi-perspective knowledge organization. Explorative conceptualization of topical content domains. Knowledge Organization, 38(6), 503–514.
Kaipainen, M., & Hautamäki, A. (2015). A perspectivist approach to conceptual spaces. In F. Zenker & P. Gärdenfors (Eds.), Applications of conceptual spaces: The case for geometric knowledge representation (Synthese Library Volume 359). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kaipainen, M., & Hautamäki, A. (2016). Analysis and synthesis with a three-component inferential system: Augmenting the explanatory scope of Conceptual Spaces. AIC 4th international workshop on artificial intelligence and cognition. New York City, July 16–17 2016. Accessible at http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1895/paper11.pdf
Kant, I. (1783). Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that will be able to present itself as a Science (orig. in German).
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lewis, C. I. (1956). Mind and the world order, outline of a theory of knowledge. New York: Dover.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (Colin Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and company.
Parthemore, J. (2015). Specification of the unified conceptual space, for purposes of empirical investigation. Springer. In F. Zenker & P. Gärdenfors (Eds.), Applications of conceptual spaces: The case for geometric knowledge representation (Synthese library volume 359) (pp. 223–244). Dordrecht: Springer.
Parthemore, J. (2018). On the essentially dynamic nature of concepts: Constant if incremental motion in conceptual spaces. In Kaipainen, M., Zenker F., Hautamäki, A., & Gärdenfors, P. (Eds.), Conceptual spaces: Elaborations and applications. Cham: Springer.
Rizzolatti, G., & Arbib, M. A. (1998). Language within our grasp. Elsevier. Trends in Neurosciences, 21(5), 188–194.
Schlichting, M. L., Mumford, J. A., & Preston, A. R. (2015). Learning-related representational changes reveal dissociable integration and separation signatures in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Nature Communications, 6, 8151.
Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2015). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Andrews UK Limited.
Smith, L. B., & Thelen, E. (Eds.). (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (A Bradford Book).
Social Progress Imperative. (2017). Social progress index. Data set. accessed in September 2017 from http://www.socialprogressindex.com/?tab=4
Solomon, R. C. (1996). Nietzsche ad hominem: Perspectivism, personality and ressentiment. In B. Magnus & K. M. Higgins (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Nietzsche (pp. 180–222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Gelder, T., & Port, R. F (1995). It’s about time: An overview of the dynamical approach to cognition. In Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition (Vol. 1, p. 43). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). Embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Von Wright, G. (1971). Explanation and understanding. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636.
Zenker F., & Gärdenfors P. (2015). Applications of conceptual spaces (Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, Vol. 359). Springer. Synthese library.
Acknowledgements
Writing this chapter was financially supported by The Foundation for Baltic and East European Studies (Östersjöstiftelsen), Sweden.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kaipainen, M., Hautamäki, A. (2019). Seeking for the Grasp: An Iterative Subdivision Model of Conceptualisation. In: Kaipainen, M., Zenker, F., Hautamäki, A., Gärdenfors, P. (eds) Conceptual Spaces: Elaborations and Applications. Synthese Library, vol 405. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12800-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12800-5_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12799-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12800-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)