Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-cfh4f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-23T18:05:37.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Of mice and men, nature and nurture, and a few red herrings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 August 2017

Marc D. Hauser
Marc D. Hauser*
Affiliation:
Risk-Eraser, West Falmouth, MA 02574 marc@risk-eraser.com www.risk-eraser.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Burkart et al.'s proposal is based on three false premises: (1) theories of the mind are either domain-specific/modular (DSM) or domain-general (DG); (2) DSM systems are considered inflexible, built by nature; and (3) animal minds are deemed as purely DSM. Clearing up these conceptual confusions is a necessary first step in understanding how general intelligence evolved.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e204
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bradford, E. E. F., Jentzsch, I. & Gomez, J.-C. (2015) From self to social cognition: Theory of mind mechanisms and their relation to executive functioning. Cognition 138:21–34.Google Scholar
Hauser, M., Pearson, H. & Seelig, D. (2002a) Ontogeny of tool use in cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus: Innate recognition of functionally relevant features. Animal Behaviour 64:299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, M. D. & Watumull, J. (2016) The universal generative faculty: The source of our expressive power in language, mathematics, and music. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 1–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinho, A. & Kacelnik, A. (2016) Ducklings imprint on the relational concept of “same or different”. Science 353:286–88. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf4247.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1997) How the mind works. W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G., Nishimura, M., de Heering, A., Jeffery, L. & Maurer, D. (2017) Reduced adaptability, but no fundamental disruption, of norm-based face coding following early visual deprivation from congenital cataracts. Developmental Science 20:e12384. doi: 10.1111/desc.12384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smirnova, A., Zorina, Z., Obozova, T. & Wasserman, E. (2015) Crows spontaneously exhibit analogical reasoning. Current Biology 25:256–60.Google Scholar
Soltész, F., Goswami, U., White, S. & Szűcs, D. (2011) Executive function effects and numerical development in children: Behavioural and ERP evidence from a numerical Stroop paradigm. Learning and Individual Differences 21:662–71.Google Scholar
ten Cate, C. (2016) Assessing the uniqueness of language: Animal grammatical abilities take center stage. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1–6. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1091-9.Google Scholar