title: Flexible intuitions of Euclidean geometry in an Amazonian indigene group.
abstract: Kant argued that Euclidean geometry is synthesized on the basis of an a priori intuition of space. This proposal inspired much behavioral research probing whether spatial navigation in humans and animals conforms to the predictions of Euclidean geometry. However, Euclidean geometry also includes concepts that transcend the perceptible, such as objects that are infinitely small or infinitely large, or statements of necessity and impossibility. We tested the hypothesis that certain aspects of nonperceptible Euclidian geometry map onto intuitions of space that are present in all humans, even in the absence of formal mathematical education. Our tests probed intuitions of points, lines, and surfaces in participants from an indigene group in the Amazon, the Mundurucu, as well as adults and age-matched children controls from the United States and France and younger US children without education in geometry. The responses of Mundurucu adults and children converged with that of mathematically educated adults and children and revealed an intuitive understanding of essential properties of Euclidean geometry. For instance, on a surface described to them as perfectly planar, the Mundurucu's estimations of the internal angles of triangles added up to ~180 degrees, and when asked explicitly, they stated that there exists one single parallel line to any given line through a given point. These intuitions were also partially in place in the group of younger US participants. We conclude that, during childhood, humans develop geometrical intuitions that spontaneously accord with the principles of Euclidean geometry, even in the absence of training in mathematics.
authors: Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception, Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France. veronique.izard@polytechnique.org
authors: Véronique
authors: V
authors: Izard
authors: Pierre
authors: P
authors: Pica
authors: Elizabeth S
authors: ES
authors: Spelke
authors: Stanislas
authors: S
authors: Dehaene
references: J Exp Biol. 2005 Nov;208(Pt 21):4005-11
references: 16244161
references: Cognition. 1986 Apr;22(3):201-23
references: 2424667
references: Psychol Sci. 2004 Jun;15(6):403-8
references: 15147494
references: Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Aug;24(4):581-601; discussion 652-71
references: 12048942
references: Hum Evol. 2009 Jan 1;23(3):213-248
references: 21359132
references: Annu Rev Neurosci. 2008;31:69-89
references: 18284371
references: Psychol Rev. 1948 Jul;55(4):189-208
references: 18870876
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jan 18;108(3):1152-7
references: 21199934
references: Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003 Nov;114(3):355-78
references: 14670704
references: Cognition. 2008 Nov;109(2):281-6
references: 18952206
references: Cogn Sci. 2010 May 1;34(5):863-884
references: 20625445
references: Dev Sci. 2008 Mar;11(2):F1-7
references: 18333971
references: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2009 Feb;19(1):20-6
references: 19299120
references: J Exp Child Psychol. 1991 Jun;51(3):395-406
references: 2072083
references: Infancy. 2008 Mar 4;13(2):103-127
references: 33412723
references: Philos Psychol. 2008 Aug 1;21(4):491
references: 20165569
references: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008 Mar;1124:77-97
references: 18400925
references: Science. 1981 Sep 11;213(4513):1275-8
references: 7268438
references: Science. 2004 Oct 15;306(5695):499-503
references: 15486303
references: Psychol Rev. 1991 Jul;98(3):430-53
references: 1891525
references: Science. 2006 Jan 20;311(5759):381-4
references: 16424341
references: Science. 2008 May 30;320(5880):1217-20
references: 18511690
references: Science. 1986 May 16;232(4752):861-3
references: 17755968
references: Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 May;134(1):40-7
references: 20053390
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Feb;12(1):1-23
references: 15945200