Structural Intuitions

"All great achievements of science must start from intuitive knowledge," wrote Albert Einstein. In Structural Intuitions, a fascinating exploration of the commonalities between two seemingly disparate realms, renowned art historian Martin Kemp applies Einstein's notion both to science and to art. Kemp argues that in both fields, work begins at the intuitive level, curiosity aroused by our recognition of patterns or order. Kemp's "structural intuitions," then, are the ways we engage fundamental perceptual and cognitive mechanisms to bring order to our observed world. Through stimulating juxtaposition, Kemp considers connections between naturally occurring patterns, cognitive processes, and artistic and scientific expression, drawing on an array of examples from the Renaissance through the present. Taking a broadly historical approach, Kemp examines forms and processes such as the geometry of Platonic solids, the dynamics of growth, and the patterns of fluids in motion, while placing the work of contemporary artists, engineers, and scientists in dialogue with that of visionaries such as Leonardo da Vinci and D'Arcy Thompson. Richly illustrated, lucidly written, and wonderfully thought-provoking, Structural Intuitions is essential reading for anyone seeking insight into common ground in the arts and sciences.

This book examines the evidential status and use of linguistic intuitions, a topic that has seen increased interest in recent years. Linguists use native speakers' intuitions - such as whether or not an utterance sounds acceptable - as evidence for theories about language, but this approach is not uncontroversial. The two parts of this volume draw on the most recent work in both philosophy and linguistics to explore the two major issues at the heart of the debate. Chapters in the first part address the 'justification question', critically analysing and evaluating the theoretical rationale for the evidential use of linguistic intuitions. The second part discusses recent developments in the domain of experimental syntax, focusing on the question of whether formal and systematic models of gathering intuitions are epistemically and methodologically superior to the informal methods that have traditionally been used. The volume provides valuable insights into whether and how linguistic intuitions can be used in theorizing about language, and will be of interest to graduate students and researchers in linguistics, philosophy, and cognitive science.

A reply to contemporary skepticism about intuitions and a priori knowledge, and a defense of neo-rationalism from a contemporary Kantian standpoint, focusing on the theory of rational intuitions and on solving the two core problems of justifying and explaining them.

Charles Chihara's new book develops and defends a structural view of the nature of mathematics, and uses it to explain a number of striking features of mathematics that have puzzled philosophers for centuries. The view is used to show that, in order to understand how mathematical systems are applied in science and everyday life, it is not necessary to assume that its theorems either presuppose mathematical objects or are even true. Chihara builds upon his previous work, in which he presented a new system of mathematics, the constructibility theory, which did not make reference to, or presuppose, mathematical objects. Now he develops the project further by analysing mathematical systems currently used by scientists to show how such systems are compatible with this nominalistic outlook. He advances several new ways of undermining the heavily discussed indispensability argument for the existence of mathematical objects made famous by Willard Quine and Hilary Putnam. And Chihara presents a rationale for the nominalistic outlook that is quite different from those generally put forward, which he maintains have led to serious misunderstandings. A Structural Account of Mathematics will be required reading for anyone working in this field.

Almost four decades have passed since "Formal Grammars "first appeared in 1974. At that time it was still possible to rather comprehensively review for (psycho)linguists the relevant literature on the theory of formal languages and automata, on their applications in linguistic theory and in the psychology of language. That is no longer feasible. In all three areas developments have been substantial, if not breathtaking. Nowadays, an interested linguist or psycholinguist opening any text on formal languages can no longer see the wood for the trees, as it is by no means evident which formal, mathematical tools are really required for natural language applications. An historical perspective can be helpful here. There are paths through the wood that have been beaten since decades; they can still provide useful orientation. The origins of these paths can be traced in the three volumes of "Formal Grammars," brought together in the present re-edition. In a newly added postscript the author has sketched what has become, after all these years, of formal grammars in linguistics and psycholinguistics, or at least some of the core developments. This chapter may provide further motivation for the reader to make a trip back to some of the historical sources.

Toward a Structural Psychology of Cinema Approaches to Semiotics [AS].

In writing the present book I have had in mind the following objectives: - To propose a theoretical, comprehensive view of the domain of intuition. - To identify and organize the experimental findings related to intuition scattered in a wide variety of research contexts. - To reveal the educational implications of the idea, developed for science and mathematics education. Most of the existing monographs in the field of intuition are mainly concerned with theoretical debates - definitions, philosophical attitudes, historical considerations. (See, especially the works of Wild (1938), of Bunge (1 962) and of Noddings and Shore (1 984).) A notable exception is the book by Westcott (1968), which combines theoretical analyses with the author’s own experimental studies. But, so far, no attempt has been made to identify systematically those findings, spread throughout the research literature, which could contribute to the deciphering of the mechanisms of intuition. Very often the relevant studies do not refer explicitly to intuition. Even when this term is used it occurs, usually, as a self-evident, common sense term.