Connectionism, classical cognitivism, and the relation between cognitive and implementational levels of analysis
Philosophical Psychology 6 (3):321-33 (1993)
|Abstract||This paper discusses the relation between cognitive and implementational levels of analysis. Chalmers (1990, 1993) argues that a connectionist implementation of a classical cognitive architecture possesses a compositional semantics, and therefore undercuts Fodor and Pylyshyn's (1988) argument that connectionist networks cannot possess a compositional semantics. I argue that Chalmers argument misconstrues the relation between cognitive and implementational levels of analysis. This paper clarifies the distinction, and shows that while Fodor and Pylyshyn's argument survives Chalmers' critique, it cannot be used to establish the irrelevance of neurophysiological implementation to cognitive modeling; some aspects of Chater and Oaksford's (1990) response to Fodor and Pylyshyn, though not all, are therefore cogent|
|Keywords||Cognitivism Compositionality Connectionism Epistemology Chalmers, A Fodor, J Pylyshyn, Z|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jerry A. Fodor & Zenon W. Pylyshyn (1988). Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture. Cognition 28:3-71.
Paul Smolensky (1991). Connectionism, Constituency and the Language of Thought. In Barry M. Loewer & Georges Rey (eds.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and His Critics. Blackwell.
James W. Garson (1994). Cognition Without Classical Architecture. Synthese 100 (2):291-306.
Robert J. Matthews (1994). Three-Concept Monte: Explanation, Implementation, and Systematicity. Synthese 101 (3):347-63.
Benny Shanon (1992). Are Connectionist Models Cognitive? Philosophical Psychology 5 (3):235-255.
Mark Rowlands (1994). Connectionism and the Language of Thought. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (2):485-503.
David J. Chalmers (1993). Connectionism and Compositionality: Why Fodor and Pylyshyn Were Wrong. Philosophical Psychology 6 (3):305-319.
James H. Fetzer (1992). Connectionism and Cognition: Why Fodor and Pylyshyn Are Wrong. In A. Clark & Ronald Lutz (eds.), Connectionism in Context. Springer-Verlag.
Michael V. Antony (1991). Fodor and Pylyshyn on Connectionism. Minds and Machines 1 (3):321-41.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #87,887 of 549,068 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,068 )
How can I increase my downloads?