Summary of the 5th class

The Prototype Theory of Concepts (1)

Last Friday we discussed a few introductory matters concerning the Prototype Theory of Concepts.  This collection of theories called the Prototype Theory (PT) emerged in the ‘70s and was developed to address some of the difficulties in Classical Theory. The most significant problem for the definitional structure of concepts that PT tries to account for is the problem of psychological reality. The main tenets of PT are extrapolated from data gathered from psychological experiments. These data proved to be unaffected when studying concepts as definitions.
Here are the main ideas of PT that we mentioned in class:
- Concepts have a structure that encodes a statistical analysis of the properties their members tend to have. Hence, we can identify central or typical members of a category on the one hand, and less typical or peripheral members on the other hand. Concepts with prototypical structure –> their extensions as being graded: birdier, fruitier.
- The features of a concept are not necessary, as there may be items in the extension of a concept that fail to instantiate a certain property(ies). See the zebra without stripes or the 3-legged albino tiger examples.
- Classical Theory –> concept application must satisfy all of the concept’s features, PT –> must satisfy a sufficient number of features, some of which weigh more than others.
- Family resemblance: formal criteria are neither logical nor psychological necessity; open-ended set of properties; falling under the boundaries of a similarity space.
We didn’t say much about the advantages or the criticisms of PT (we’ll do this during the next meeting), but instead we tried to do an exercise.  We chose SCIENCE from a list of four other concepts, and we suggested a list of characteristic features for this concept’s prototype. Furthermore, we discussed some members of the category and tried to grade them for typicality. This task proved to be quite challenging, as you remember, and we had a hard time trying to grade the members we found. Now, let me suggest a rethinking of the exercise as follows:

	SCIENCE	PHYSICS	MATHEMATICS	MUSIC	LAW
Works with demonstrated data	Yes	yes	Yes	No	No
Is built on theories	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
Has a rigid structure  (is formalized)	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Guides our perception of the world	Yes	Yes	?	?	No
Is innovative	yes	Yes	No	Yes	No
Makes predictions about facts and behaviours	Yes	Yes	No	No	No