Iris Berent

Few questions are as controversial as the origins of knowledge. Chapter 5 demonstrates that laypeople are systematically biased against innate ideas, and that this bias arises from intuitive Dualism and Essentialism. Specifically, if per Dualism, ideas are immaterial, whereas, if per Essentialism, ideas must be material, then it follows that ideas cannot be innate. Experiments 1–4 suggest that people view epistemic traits (i.e., ideas) as less material (e.g., less localized in the brain, in line with Dualism). Experiments 5–8 suggest that traits presented as innate (i.e., essence-defining) are viewed as more material (in line with Essentialism). Finally, Experiments 9 and 10 suggest that the effect of Dualism and Essentialism is causal: when people are presented with evidence of either mind-body Physicalism, generally, or of the materiality of individual traits, specifically, their presumption of innateness increases. These results open the possibility that empiricism is natural: it arises from principles that lie deep within human cognition.