David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):577-660 (1999)
Prior to the twentieth century, theories of knowledge were inherently perceptual. Since then, developments in logic, statis- tics, and programming languages have inspired amodal theories that rest on principles fundamentally different from those underlying perception. In addition, perceptual approaches have become widely viewed as untenable because they are assumed to implement record- ing systems, not conceptual systems. A perceptual theory of knowledge is developed here in the context of current cognitive science and neuroscience. During perceptual experience, association areas in the brain capture bottom-up patterns of activation in sensory-motor areas. Later, in a top-down manner, association areas partially reactivate sensory-motor areas to implement perceptual symbols. The stor- age and reactivation of perceptual symbols operates at the level of perceptual components – not at the level of holistic perceptual expe- riences. Through the use of selective attention, schematic representations of perceptual components are extracted from experience and stored in memory (e.g., individual memories of green, purr, hot). As memories of the same component become organized around a com- mon frame, they implement a simulator that produces limitless simulations of the component (e.g., simulations of purr). Not only do such simulators develop for aspects of sensory experience, they also develop for aspects of proprioception (e.g., lift, run) and introspec- tion (e.g., compare, memory, happy, hungry). Once established, these simulators implement a basic conceptual system that represents types, supports categorization, and produces categorical inferences. These simulators further support productivity, propositions, and ab- stract concepts, thereby implementing a fully functional conceptual system. Productivity results from integrating simulators combinato- rially and recursively to produce complex simulations. Propositions result from binding simulators to perceived individuals to represent type-token relations. Abstract concepts are grounded in complex simulations of combined physical and introspective events. Thus, a per- ceptual theory of knowledge can implement a fully functional conceptual system while avoiding problems associated with amodal sym- bol systems. Implications for cognition, neuroscience, evolution, development, and artificial intelligence are explored.
|Keywords||perception representation experience concepts|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
William Bechtel (2005). Explanation: A Mechanist Alternative. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biol and Biomed Sci 36 (2):421--441.
Derek C. Penn, Keith J. Holyoak & Daniel J. Povinelli (2008). Darwin's Mistake: Explaining the Discontinuity Between Human and Nonhuman Minds. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (2):109-130.
Michael L. Anderson (2010). Neural Reuse: A Fundamental Organizational Principle of the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):245.
Lawrence W. Barsalou, W. Kyle Simmons, Aron K. Barbey & Christine D. Wilson (2003). Grounding Conceptual Knowledge in Modality-Specific Systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (2):84-91.
Petra Vetter & Albert Newen (2014). Varieties of Cognitive Penetration in Visual Perception. Consciousness and Cognition 27:62-75.
Similar books and articles
Murat Aydede (1999). What Makes Perceptual Symbols Perceptual? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):610-611.
Lawrence W. Barsalou (1999). Perceptions of Perceptual Symbols. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):637-660.
W. Martin Davies (2004). Amodal or Perceptual Symbol Systems: A False Dichotomy? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):162-163.
Rolf A. Zwaan, Robert A. Stanfield & Carol J. Madden (1999). Perceptual Symbols in Language Comprehension: Can an Empirical Case Be Made? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):636-637.
F. Lowenthal (1999). Can Handicapped Subjects Use Perceptual Symbol Systems? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):625-626.
Bipin Indurkhya (1999). Creativity of Metaphor in Perceptual Symbol Systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):621-622.
Ruediger Oehlmann (1999). Can Metacognition Be Explained in Terms of Perceptual Symbol Systems? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):629-630.
Arthur B. Markman & Eric Dietrich (1999). Whither Structured Representation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):626-627.
Louis C. Charland (1999). Perceptual Symbol Systems and Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):612-613.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1,002 ( #292 of 1,790,294 )
Recent downloads (6 months)395 ( #181 of 1,790,294 )
How can I increase my downloads?