structure for 'Thought'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

18. Thought / D. Concepts / 5. Concepts and Language / c. Concepts without language

[possibility of non-linguistic concepts]

4 ideas
If someone has aphasia but can still play chess, they clearly have concepts [Geach]
     Full Idea: If a man struck with aphasia can still play bridge or chess, I certainly wish to say he still has the concepts involved in the game, although he can no longer exercise them verbally.
     From: Peter Geach (Mental Acts: their content and their objects [1957], §5)
     A reaction: Geach proceeds thereafter to concentrate on language, but this caveat is crucial. To suggest that concepts are entirely verbal has always struck me as ridiculous, and an insult to our inarticulate mammalian cousins.
Maybe there can be non-conscious concepts (e.g. in bees) [Dennett]
     Full Idea: Concepts do not require consciousness. As Jaynes says, the bee has a concept of a flower, but not a conscious concept.
     From: Daniel C. Dennett (Brainchildren [1998], Ch.6)
     A reaction: Does the flower have a concept of rain? Rain plays a big functional role in its existence. It depends, alas, on what we mean by a 'concept'.
Prelinguistic infants acquire and use many categories [Gelman]
     Full Idea: Language does not appear to be necessary for forming categories, since prelinguistic infants acquire many categories, and even use categories to form inferences about unknown properties.
     From: Susan A. Gelman (The Essential Child [2003], 08 'Intro')
     A reaction: She cites lots of research in support of this claim. The idea may come as a surprise to some people, but not to me. I take it that categorisation is what a brain is for, including animal brains.
People can formulate new concepts which are only named later [Margolis/Laurence]
     Full Idea: People seem to be able to formulate novel concepts which are left to be named later; the concept comes first, the name second.
     From: E Margolis/S Laurence (Concepts [2009], 4.2)
     A reaction: [This seems to have empirical support, and he cites Pinker 1994] I do not find this remotely surprising, since I presume that human concepts are a continuous kind with animal concepts, including non-conscious concepts (why not?).