Chapter 5. Why Isn't Stich an ElimiNativist?

  1. Dominic Murphy Senior Lecturer2 and
  2. Michael Bishop Professor3
  1. Fiona Cowie Associate Professor

Published Online: 14 APR 2009

DOI: 10.1002/9781444308709.ch5

Stich: And His Critics

Stich: And His Critics

How to Cite

Cowie, F. (2009) Why Isn't Stich an ElimiNativist?, in Stich: And His Critics (eds D. Murphy and M. Bishop), Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK. doi: 10.1002/9781444308709.ch5

Editor Information

  1. 2

    The University of Sydney, Australia

  2. 3

    Florida State University, USA

Author Information

  1. The California Institute of Technology, USA

Publication History

  1. Published Online: 14 APR 2009
  2. Published Print: 20 MAR 2009

ISBN Information

Print ISBN: 9781405112079

Online ISBN: 9781444308709

SEARCH

Keywords:

  • Why Isn't Stich an ElimiNativist?;
  • What is Innateness? - concept of innateness with Stich's “Introduction” to Innate Ideas (Stich 1975);
  • innateness and cognitive science;
  • innateness and biology;
  • the inner and the outer;
  • third major line of thinking about innateness, and last overtly biological in tone;
  • case for ElimiNativism and against premature elimination;
  • aren't any eliminativism and its bearing on elimiNativism;
  • good uses for bad concepts

Summary

This chapter contains sections titled:

  • What is Innateness?

  • The Case for ElimiNativism

  • Good Uses for Bad Concepts

  • Against Premature Elimination

  • References