Difference between revisions of "Are Emotions Natural Kinds"

m (needs conversion)
(need to save SMW before it can be accessed :-P)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[category:needs conversion]]
<hide>
[[category:specs.target|Barrett 2006]]
[[category:needs tweaking]]: need list of responses; rewrite targ.show.page as module function
* <section begin=author />Barrett, L.F.<section end=author />
 
* <section begin=year />2006<section end=year />
[[keyname::2006-Barrett]]
* <section begin=ref />[[Are Emotions Natural Kinds?|Barrett 2006]]<section end=ref />
[[author::Barrett, L.F.]]
* <section begin=title />[[Are Emotions Natural Kinds?]]<section end=title />
[[year::2006]]
* <section begin=source />''Perspectives on Psychological Science'', 1, 28-58<section end=source />
[[cite/author::Barrett 2006]]
* <section begin=abstract />Laypeople and scientists alike believe that they know anger, or sadness, or fear, when they see it. These emotions and a few others are presumed to have specific causal mechanisms in the brain and properties that are observable (on the face, in the voice, in the body, or in experience) &ndash; that is, they are assumed to be natural kinds. If a given emotion is a natural kind and can be identified objectively, then it is possible to make discoveries about emotion. Indeed, the scientific study of emotion is founded on this assumption. In this article, I review the accumulating empirical evidence that is inconsistent with the view that there are kinds of emotion with boundaries that are carved in nature. I then consider what moving beyond a natural-kind view might mean for the scientific understanding of emotion.<section end=abstract />
[[title::Are Emotions Natural Kinds?]]
* <section begin=response-qty />1<section end=response-qty />
[[published in::Perspectives on Psychological Science]]
* <section begin=response-list />{{response-ref|response:2006-Alvarado.1}}<section end=response-list />
[[cite/source::''Perspectives on Psychological Science'', 1, 28-58]]
 
<call func=smw.let.echo key=abstract>Laypeople and scientists alike believe that they know anger, or sadness, or fear, when they see it. These emotions and a few others are presumed to have specific causal mechanisms in the brain and properties that are observable (on the face, in the voice, in the body, or in experience) &ndash; that is, they are assumed to be natural kinds. If a given emotion is a natural kind and can be identified objectively, then it is possible to make discoveries about emotion. Indeed, the scientific study of emotion is founded on this assumption. In this article, I review the accumulating empirical evidence that is inconsistent with the view that there are kinds of emotion with boundaries that are carved in nature. I then consider what moving beyond a natural-kind view might mean for the scientific understanding of emotion.</call>
</hide><exec mod=psycrit func=Show_Target_Page />

Revision as of 17:31, 12 September 2012

<exec mod=psycrit func=Show_Target_Page />

Retrieved from "https://psycrit.com/w/index.php?title=Are_Emotions_Natural_Kinds&oldid=2405"
... more about "Are Emotions Natural Kinds"
RDF feed
Author
Barrett, L.F. +
Cite/author
Barrett 2006 +
Cite/source
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 28-58 +
Keyname
2006-Barrett +
Published in
Perspectives on Psychological Science +
Title
Are Emotions Natural Kinds? +
Year
2006 +