Is Emotion a Natural Kind

By Paul E. Griffiths. 2002

96 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2da1e963df52788bcd33cda31a89f4e08cf85a43

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. C. Izard
2. M. Jacobs
3. P. Garner
4. S. D’Mello
5. Ross A Thompson
6. S. Denham
7. Kristen A. Lindquist
8. Dawn A. Matsumoto

Citations in the corpus

• Don’t Give Up on Basic Emotions (2011, methodology): “In this article, we rely on the antiessentialist account of HPC natural kinds, which we consider to be the one most suitable for the needs of affective science (see Griffiths, 1997, 2004; Scarantino, 2009, in press b).”
• Basic Emotions, Natural Kinds, Emotion Schemas, and a New Paradigm (2007, background): “These five characteristics and their associated structural components can be considered a cluster of properties that define basic emotions as natural kinds (Buck, 1999; Damasio et al., 2000; Panksepp, 2000, 2007; cf. Barrett, 2006; Rorty, 1980, 2004; cf. Charland, 2002, 2005; Griffiths, 2004).”