Number Nativism is the view that humans innately represent precise natural numbers. Despite a long and venerable history, it is often considered hopelessly out of touch with the empirical record. I argue that this is a mistake. After clarifying Number Nativism and distancing it from related conjectures, I distinguish three arguments which have been seen to refute the view. I argue that, while popular, two of these arguments miss the mark, and fail to place pressure on Number Nativism. Meanwhile, a third argument is best construed as a challenge: rather than refuting Number Nativism, it challenges its proponents to provide positive evidence for their thesis and show that this can be squared with apparent counterevidence. In response, I introduce psycholinguistic work on The Tolerance Principle (not yet considered in this context), propose that it is hard to make sense of without positing precise and innate representations of natural numbers, and argue that there is no obvious reason why these innate representations couldn't serve as a basis for mature numeric conception.

中文翻译：

---

 数字本土主义1


数字本土主义认为人类天生代表精确的自然数。尽管它有着悠久而悠久的历史，但它常常被认为与经验记录完全脱节。我认为这是一个错误。在澄清数字本土主义并将其与相关猜想区分开来之后，我区分了三个被视为反驳该观点的论点。我认为，虽然这些论点很受欢迎，但其中有两个论点没有切中要害，未能对数字本土主义施加压力。与此同时，第三个论点最好被理解为一种挑战：它不是反驳数字本土主义，而是挑战其支持者为他们的论文提供积极的证据，并表明这可以与明显的反证据相一致。作为回应，我介绍了关于宽容原则的心理语言学工作（尚未在本文中考虑），提出如果不设定自然数的精确和固有的表示，就很难理解，并认为没有明显的理由为什么这些固有的表示表示不能作为成熟数值概念的基础。