Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy University of Southern California
Abstract
AbstractNumber Nativism is the view that humans innately represent precise natural numbers. Despite a long and venerable history, it is often considered hopelessly out of touch with the empirical record. I argue that this is a mistake. After clarifying Number Nativism and distancing it from related conjectures, I distinguish three arguments which have been seen to refute the view. I argue that, while popular, two of these arguments miss the mark, and fail to place pressure on Number Nativism. Meanwhile, a third argument is best construed as a challenge: rather than refuting Number Nativism, it challenges its proponents to provide positive evidence for their thesis and show that this can be squared with apparent counterevidence. In response, I introduce psycholinguistic work on The Tolerance Principle (not yet considered in this context), propose that it is hard to make sense of without positing precise and innate representations of natural numbers, and argue that there is no obvious reason why these innate representations couldn't serve as a basis for mature numeric conception.
Reference114 articles.
1. Anderson S. R.(1969).West Scandinavian vowel systems and the ordering of phonological rules. PhD thesis MIT.
2. On representational content and format in core numerical cognition;Ball B.;Philosophical Psychology,2017
3. The construction of large number representations in adults;Barth H.;Cognition,2003