David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 95 (2):141 - 168 (1993)
To begin, I introduce an analysis of interlevel relations that allows us to offer an initial characterization of the debate about the way classical and connectionist models relate. Subsequently, I examine a compatibility thesis and a conditional claim on this issue.With respect to the compatibility thesis, I argue that, even if classical and connectionist models are not necessarily incompatible, the emergence of the latter seems to undermine the best arguments for the Language of Thought Hypothesis, which is essential to the former.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Eric Lormand (1991). Classical and Connectionist Models. Dissertation, MIT
Brian P. McLaughlin & F. Warfield (1994). The Allure of Connectionism Reexamined. Synthese 101 (3):365-400.
Ron Sun (2003). Conceptions and Misconceptions of Connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):621-621.
Murat Aydede (1997). Language of Thought: The Connectionist Contribution. Minds and Machines 7 (1):57-101.
Jonathan Opie (1998). Connectionist Modelling Strategies. Psycoloquy 9 (30).
John Hawthorne (1989). On the Compatibility of Connectionist and Classical Models. Philosophical Psychology 2 (1):5-16.
Josep E. Corbi (1993). Classical and Connectionist Models: Levels of Description. Synthese 95 (2):141-68.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #181,329 of 1,780,099 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #291,056 of 1,780,099 )
How can I increase my downloads?