Further Comments on Ahn et al

In what follows I supplement my published reply (Strevens 2001) to Ahn et al.’s commentary (Ahn et al. 2001) on my paper concerning psychological essentialism (Strevens 2000). The supplementary comments come in three parts. First, I ask whether my alternative to psychological essentialism, which I call the minimal hypothesis, or minimalism for short, can explain certain experimental results of Ahn and her coworkers. Second, I comment on Ahn et al.’s handling of my charge that Barbara Malt’s work on the concept of water militates against psychological essentialism. Third, I remark on a deep theoretical difference between psychological essentialism and my minimalist approach to the psychology of natural kind terms.