Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Aristotles theory of boundary conditions led to the necessary and sufficient features model of categorisation that was taken for granted until thinkers like Posner and Rosch argued that it did not accord with the facts about human memory. Perhaps the difficulty of the modus tollens might actually imply this. (Necessary features are ones which are necessary for x to belong to category C , i.e. if this feature is missing then x does not belong e.g. Pinky is not a pig if he has no tail. Sufficient features are ones which are enough to qualify x as a member of C, regardless of any other characteristics x has, e.g. if you are the eldest son of a duke then you are an aristocrat regardless of any other characteristics you may have.) The syllogistic feature model of categorisation is not strictly part of Aristotle's psychology. He does not offer it as a description of human thought and memory; it is instead part of his logic, i.e. description and prescription for drawing correct conclusions from premises. Nevertheless the "classical" concept of categorisation was applied not just to argument and definition but also to assumptions about how we store knowledge and utilise it. Aristotle himself uses the syllogism as a schema for his descriptions of thought processes. He describes decision making as a form of syllogistic reasoning. For instance one might recognise that food of a certain type is good for individuals with a particular medical condition, recognise that one has this medical condition, and then select food of that type when given a choice. This is syllogistic: it has a general rule about the relation between this type of medical condition and this type of food (the major premise linking members of a certain category, i.e. those with the condition, with a particular characteristic, i.e. experiencing benefits from a certain type of food); it defines an individual (oneself) as a member of the category of those suffering from this condition (the minor premise), and then draws the conclusion that therefore this individual will benefit from this kind of food. This is the practical equivalent of the standard modus ponens syllogism above:- All men are mortal; S. is a man; therefore S. is mortal. The interesting implications Aristotle goes on to infer from this model have influenced legal thought ever since, especially in Roman jurisprudence and its modern successors. At the very end of the twentieth century psychologists started to catch up. Aristotle suggests that in a reasoning process of the kind he has outlined various (cognitive) errors can readily occur. One might forget the general rule (the major premise), or, as jargon might put it now, the rule might not be readily accessible or available in memory. One might also forget that one has this medical condition (the minor premise). One might also fail to recognise that one of the available choices of food is of the appropriate type, while others perhaps are not. This idea that mistaken, bad decisions, whether in matters of self-interest or morality, may actually be due to faulty cognitive processes contrasts with the Platonic model that was so completely absorbed into European religious and everyday thought that we almost take it for granted. Although Plato offered a number of possible explanations for failure to make the correct choice, whether in ones own or in others interests, his most fully worked out explanation is in terms of temptation and weakness one cannot resist the gorgeous high-fat food. This explanation permeates Christian thought, especially in its post-reformation incarnations. It is also the basis of the idea that human nature is riddled with self-conflict and inner torment. The representative and influential example in psychology is of course Freud. But the idea has often been applied to theories of neurosis, and was domesticated within the Learning Theory tradition in Millers 1940s experiments on approach-avoidance conflict in rats. In discussing decision making, Aristotle continually uses examples drawn from health topics (his father was court physician to Alexander the Greats father). At the end of the twentieth century health psychologist began to use an Aristotelian model in dealing with patients with medical conditions that require self-regulation. (In Aristotles Greek the word for this kind of self-regulation is diaita. In English this word transliterates as diet.) Temptation and laziness do not seem to account for all deviations from health regimes. Sometimes patients recognise a general rule (the major premise) but do not think it applies to them (the minor premise). For example hypertension patients apparently sincerely acknowledge that hypertension has no symptoms, but consider that their own hypertension does have symptoms. This has the unfortunate consequence that they vary their medication according to the prevalence of their symptoms.