David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Mind and Language 18 (5):502-523 (2003)
This paper sketches a solution to a problem which has been emphasized by Fodor. This is the problem of how to explain distinctively-human flexible cognition in modular terms. There are three aspects to the proposed account. First, it is suggested that natural language sentences might serve to integrate the outputs of a number of conceptual modules. Second, a creative sentence-generator, or supposer, is postulated. And third, it is argued that a set of principles of inference to the best explanation can be constructed from already-extant aspects of linguistic testimony and discourse interpretation. Most importantly, it is suggested that the resulting architecture should be implementable in ways that are computationally tractable
|Keywords||Cognition Inference Language Sentence Fodor, J|
|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
Axel Gelfert (2010). Reconsidering the Role of Inference to the Best Explanation in the Epistemology of Testimony. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (4):386-396.
Matthew J. Rellihan (2009). Fodor's Riddle of Abduction. Philosophical Studies 144 (2):313 - 338.
Bradley Rives (2009). Concept Cartesianism, Concept Pragmatism, and Frege Cases. Philosophical Studies 144 (2):211 - 238.
Axel Gelfert (2011). Steps to an Ecology of Knowledge: Continuity and Change in the Genealogy of Knowledge. Episteme 8 (1):67-82.
Sheldon J. Chow (2013). What's the Problem with the Frame Problem? Review of Philosophy and Psychology 4 (2):309-331.
Similar books and articles
Robert A. Wilson (2008). What Computers (Still, Still) Can't Do: Jerry Fodor on Computation and Modularity. In Robert J. Stainton (ed.), New Essays in Philosophy of Language and Mind.
Jay L. Garfield (1997). Mentalese Not Spoken Here: Computation, Cognition, and Causation. Philosophical Psychology 10 (4):413-35.
Steven Pinker (2005). So How Does the Mind Work? Mind and Language 20 (1):1-38.
Jacob J. Ross (1990). Against Postulating Central Systems in the Mind. Philosophy of Science 57 (2):297-312.
Dominic Murphy (2006). On Fodor's Analogy: Why Psychology is Like Philosophy of Science After All. Mind and Language 21 (5):553-564.
Michael V. Antony (1991). Fodor and Pylyshyn on Connectionism. Minds and Machines 1 (3):321-41.
Greg Ray (1997). Fodor and the Inscrutability Problem. Mind and Language 12 (3-4):475-89.
John M. Collins (2005). On the Input Problem for Massive Modularity. Minds and Machines 15 (1):1-22.
Susan Schneider (2007). Yes, It Does: A Diatribe on Jerry Fodor's the Mind Doesn't Work That Way. Psyche.
S. Okasha (2003). Fodor on Cognition, Modularity, and Adaptationism. Philosophy of Science 70 (1):68-88.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads38 ( #53,991 of 1,679,353 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #78,917 of 1,679,353 )
How can I increase my downloads?