Press the right key for the next slide (or swipe left)
Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)
Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (no equivalent if you don't have a keyboard)
Press m or double tap to see a menu of slides
Are humans’ representations of syntax knowledge?
Humans can’t usually report any relevant facts about syntax.
Reply: maybe they know but don’t know they know.
‘It is of the essence of a belief [or knowledge] state that it be at the service of many distinct projects, and that its influence on any project be mediated by other beliefs.’
Evans 1981, p. 337
Humans’ representations concerning syntax are tied to a single project.
(One requirement for this is that they exhibit limited accessibility.)
‘At the level of output, one who possesses the tacit knowledge that p is disposed to do and think some of the things which one who had the ordinary belief that p would be inclined to do an think (given the same desires).
‘At the level of input, one who possesses the state of tacit knowledge that p will very probably have acquired that state as the result of exposure to usage which supports of confirms … the proposition that p, and hence in circumstances which might well induce in a rational person the ordinary belief that p.’
(Evans 1981, p. 336)
The generality constraint applies to knowledge knowledge but not to tacit knowledge.
Humans’ representations of syntax aren’t knowledge because they exhibit limited accessbility and are tied to a single project.
What is the relation between core knowledge and knowledge knowledge?
The Wrong View
Modules ‘provide an automatic starting engine for encyclopaedic knowledge’
Leslie 1988: 194
‘The module … automatically provides a conceptual identification of its input for central thought … in exactly the right format for inferential processes’
Leslie 1988: 193-4
development as rediscovery