Talk:Jerry Fodor on mental architecture

Superseded?

How much of this article is superseded by Fodor's later views on modularity and the limits of Chomsky's model in The Mind Doesn't Work That Way, 2001? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.175.173.94 (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Complex concepts

"He will accept, for example, that the complex concept AIRPLANE may be composed out of simpler concepts such as FLYING and MACHINE". To my knowledge, this is false. At least such a position was explicitly argued against in Fodor's "Concepts: WTCSWW". BROWN COW is a simple concept composed of BROWN and COW, but not AIRPLANE, which by Fodor's standard is a simple concepts and hence an atomic concept. I suggest that the quoted statement be removed unless someone can provide a supporting reference. Ariosto (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis != Linguistic determinism

The page Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been moved to the title Linguistic relativity; I have updated the link in this article to go directly to the latter page, rather than to the former and then to a redirect.

The article currently states,

The most radical thesis in this regard, however, is that which, above all in linguistics and anthropology, has taken on the name of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis . This hypothesis asserts that every perceptual act is determined and constituted by the entire web of beliefs of the individual (in fact, by his whole culture).

In fact, though, that description sounds like Linguistic determinism rather than Linguistic relativity. Cnilep (talk) 15:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]