How "is" shapes "ought" for folk-biological concepts

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Philosophy of Science
• Biology

Background:

• People's understanding of biological categories is influenced by feature frequency.
• Frequent features shape both typicality judgments and normative beliefs about category members.
• The role of explanatory mechanisms in bridging 'is' and 'ought' judgments is not fully understood.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate whether the inclination to explain feature frequency drives the influence of 'is' on 'ought' beliefs.
• To examine the relationship between feature frequency, functional explanations, typicality judgments, and normative beliefs.
• To identify causal assumptions underlying inferences from feature frequency and function to normative judgments.

Main Methods:

• Four empirical studies involving 591 participants.
• Analysis of how frequent features are explained, focusing on appeals to function.
• Examination of how functional explanations impact typicality judgments and normative evaluations.
• Investigation of causal assumptions and the nature of normative inferences.

Main Results:

• Frequent features are often explained by their function (e.g., stripes for camouflage).
• Functional explanations significantly shape judgments of category member typicality.
• Both functional explanations and typicality judgments predict normative beliefs about desired features.
• Functional explanations, by specifying goals, provide a basis for normative evaluation.

Conclusions:

• The tendency to explain feature frequency through function is a key mechanism linking 'is' to 'ought'.
• Understanding the function of features is crucial for forming normative judgments about biological kinds.
• This research clarifies how perceptions of the natural world influence our judgments of how it should be.