Cargando…

Similarity After Goodman

In a famous critique, Goodman dismissed similarity as a slippery and both philosophically and scientifically useless notion. We revisit his critique in the light of important recent work on similarity in psychology and cognitive science. Specifically, we use Tversky’s influential set-theoretic accou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Decock, Lieven, Douven, Igor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3339023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22558064
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13164-010-0035-y
_version_ 1782231292463546368
author Decock, Lieven
Douven, Igor
author_facet Decock, Lieven
Douven, Igor
author_sort Decock, Lieven
collection PubMed
description In a famous critique, Goodman dismissed similarity as a slippery and both philosophically and scientifically useless notion. We revisit his critique in the light of important recent work on similarity in psychology and cognitive science. Specifically, we use Tversky’s influential set-theoretic account of similarity as well as Gärdenfors’s more recent resuscitation of the geometrical account to show that, while Goodman’s critique contained valuable insights, it does not warrant a dismissal of similarity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3339023
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33390232012-05-01 Similarity After Goodman Decock, Lieven Douven, Igor Rev Philos Psychol Article In a famous critique, Goodman dismissed similarity as a slippery and both philosophically and scientifically useless notion. We revisit his critique in the light of important recent work on similarity in psychology and cognitive science. Specifically, we use Tversky’s influential set-theoretic account of similarity as well as Gärdenfors’s more recent resuscitation of the geometrical account to show that, while Goodman’s critique contained valuable insights, it does not warrant a dismissal of similarity. Springer Netherlands 2010-06-26 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3339023/ /pubmed/22558064 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13164-010-0035-y Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Decock, Lieven
Douven, Igor
Similarity After Goodman
title Similarity After Goodman
title_full Similarity After Goodman
title_fullStr Similarity After Goodman
title_full_unstemmed Similarity After Goodman
title_short Similarity After Goodman
title_sort similarity after goodman
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3339023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22558064
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13164-010-0035-y
work_keys_str_mv AT decocklieven similarityaftergoodman
AT douvenigor similarityaftergoodman