Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The objection that the poverty of the stimulus argument f... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The objection that the poverty of the stimulus argument fails to prove UG is innately known is not a legitimate complaint

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Astronomy is a science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Demonstrative proofs are neither possible nor required in science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The analogy to astronomy conflates inference to the best explanation with inference to a uniquely innate explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Empiricist accounts like connectionism or statistical learning provide equally viable explanations of the same linguistic data.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When multiple competing hypotheses explain the same phenomena, no single explanation is scientifically privileged without further discriminating evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pullum and Scholz (2002) demonstrated that children receive far richer input than Chomsky's poverty of stimulus argument presupposes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the empirical premise that children lack sufficient input is factually undermined, the inferential gap that UG is supposed to fill does not arise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A scientific argument whose key empirical premise is contested cannot be insulated from that contestation by appeal to the permissibility of non-demonstrative proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism3 linked

    Related

    A scientific argument whose key empirical premise is contested cannot be insulat...Demonstrative proofs are neither possible nor required in scienceEmpiricist accounts like connectionism or statistical learning provide equally v...If the empirical premise that children lack sufficient input is factually underm...
    +4 moreShow less
    Linguistics is a sciencePullum and Scholz (2002) demonstrated that children receive far richer input tha...The analogy to astronomy conflates inference to the best explanation with infere...When multiple competing hypotheses explain the same phenomena, no single explana...

    Similar

    The Chomskyan poverty of the stimulus argument is quite weak.84%The poverty of the stimulus argument does not tell us much we didn't a...84%The poverty-of-stimulus argument only establishes that some constraint...81%The poverty-of-stimulus argument does not establish that Universal Gra...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: innateness-language
    View source passageHide passage
    In response to this kind of point, Chomskyans point out that the innateness of UG is an empirical hypothesis supported by a perfectly respectable inference to the best explanation. Of course there is a logical space between the conclusion that something constrains the acquisition mechanism and the Chomskyan view that these constraints are inborn representations of Binding Theory, Theta theory, the ECP, the principle of Greed or Shortest Path and so on. But the mere fact that the argument f
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit