Biological universals and the nature of fear

Journal of Philosophy 95 (3):105-132 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cognitive definitions cannot accommodate fear as it occurs in species incapable of sophisticated cognition. Some think that fear must, therefore, be noncognitive. This paper explores another option, arguably more in line with evolutionary theory: that like other "biological universals" fear admits of variation across and within species. A paradigm case of such universals is species: it is argued that they can be defined by ostension in the manner of Putnam and Kripke without implying that they must have an invariable essence. Emotions can be defined in this way too, in principle, but the theoretical understanding of homology necessary to do so is lacking at present.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,497

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
140 (#134,135)

6 months
16 (#163,630)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mohan Matthen
University of Toronto, Mississauga

Citations of this work

Resurrecting biological essentialism.Michael Devitt - 2008 - Philosophy of Science 75 (3):344-382.
Function, homology and character individuation.Paul E. Griffiths - 2006 - Philosophy of Science 73 (1):1-25.
Homology thinking.Marc Ereshefsky - 2012 - Biology and Philosophy 27 (3):381-400.

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references