Kuhn's account of family resemblance: A solution to the problem of wide-open texture

Erkenntnis 52 (3):313-337 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is a commonly raised argument against the family resemblance account of concepts that there is no limit to a concept's extension. An account of family resemblance which attempts to provide a solution to this problem by including both similarity among instances and dissimilarity to non-instances has been developed by the philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn. Similar solutions have been hinted at in the literature on family resemblance concepts, but the solution has never received a detailed investigation. I shall provide a reconstruction of Kuhn's theory and argue that his solution necessitates a developmental perspective wchich builds on both the transmission of taxonomies between generations and a progressive development through history.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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
258 (#161,395)

6 months
26 (#385,034)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Hanne Andersen
University of Copenhagen

Citations of this work

Taxonomies, Networks, and Lexicons: A Study of Kuhn’s Post-‘Linguistic Turn’ Philosophy.Vincenzo Politi - 2020 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 33 (2):87-103.
Modelling the History of Ideas.Arianna Betti & Hein van den Berg - 2014 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (4):812-835.
The Prototype Resemblance Theory of Disease.K. Sadegh-Zadeh - 2008 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (2):106-139.

View all 22 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (4):589-601.

View all 49 references / Add more references