TY - GEN ID - cogprints1988 UR - http://cogprints.org/1988/ A1 - Clancey, William Y1 - 2001/03// N2 - In this commentary, I review papers by Ohlsson & Regan (O&R), van Oers, and Dreyfus, Hershkowitz, & Schwarz (DH&S). The papers are nominally about abstraction and learning, but emphasize different kinds of problems and levels of analysis. O&R focus on mathematical, “domain independent” characteristics of abstract thinking, claiming that experience in a domain is not the main determinant of scientific discovery. van Oers focuses on the development of abstraction within activities, especially as a sequence of nested domains of concern. DH&S emphasize how nested conceptualizations co-define and provide meaning for each other (a dialectic relation). TI - Is Abstraction a Kind of Idea or How Conceptualization Works? SP - 389 AV - public EP - 421 ER -