![]() |
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
Amazon.com Textbooks Store
Shop the Amazon.com Textbooks Store and save up to 70% on textbook rentals, 90% on used textbooks and 60% on eTextbooks. |
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Atran approaches systematics as an anthropologist specializing in the study of folk classification -- the ways in which different cultures categorize the diversity of life. Against historians and philosophers who have claimed that common sense understandings of the world obstructed the growth of science, Atran argues that folk-taxonomic common sense was the framework within which the science of systematics developed. Further, it is only by trying to solve the problems posed by common sense that science gradually disengages itself from common sense and stands on its own.
After surveying the folk-taxonomic literature and the principles of cognitive anthropology, Atran turns to the often-misunderstood zoological works of Aristotle. Aristotle, Atran argues, did not use the methods of formal logic to classify unknowns, but rather to characterize more precisely the animal kinds already recognized by Greek vernacular culture.
... Read more ›On one level, this work makes a general argument about the relationship between commonsense thinking and scientific thinking. . . . On another level, the one on which the more general argument is specifically illustrated, this work is an extremely well researched and presented history of 'systematics'--thescience of Western biological classification. This story, of course, has been told before, but never so compellingly and in aid of a provocative thesis that organizes the narrative. . . . Language and the process of representation may not be sufficiently problemized in this work. But in sum, a provocative aswell as a deeply investigated study.
From Ian Hacking - London Review of Books
Cognitive science lies close by Atran's side, guiding his claim that we have an innate capacity for sorting plants and animals. The cognitive revolution, as it is now called, took off from Noam Chomsky's thesis that there is a universal grammar, somehow innate, that makes it possible for infants to catch on to any language spoken round them almost without trying. This idea, once so radical, is now celebrated as fact and as a comprehensive model for the human mind. . . . Atran's thesis about a built-in cognitive skill for sorting the living beings fits nicely into this tradition. But you don't have to recite the cognitivist catechism to gain admission to his book. You can also think heis wrong-headed in his application of the cognitivist programme, and still immensely admire his work.
|