The informed neuron: Issues in the use of information theory in the behavioral sciences [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 5 (4):583-96 (1995)
The concept of “information” is virtually ubiquitous in contemporary cognitive science. It is claimed to be “processed” (in cognitivist theories of perception and comprehension), “stored” (in cognitivist theories of memory and recognition), and otherwise manipulated and transformed by the human central nervous system. Fred Dretske's extensive philosophical defense of a theory of informational content (“semantic” information) based upon the Shannon-Weaver formal theory of information is subjected to critical scrutiny. A major difficulty is identified in Dretske's equivocations in the use of the concept of a “signal” bearing informational content. Gibson's alternative conception of information (construed as analog by Dretske), while avoiding many of the problems located in the conventional use of “signal”, raises different but equally serious questions. It is proposed that, taken literally, the human CNS does not extract or process information at all; rather, whatever “information” is construed as locatable in the CNS is information only for an observer-theorist and only for certain purposes.
|Keywords||Behavior Cognition Information Neuron Science|
|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
Rod Watson & Andrew P. Carlin (2012). 'Information': Praxeological Considerations. [REVIEW] Human Studies 35 (2):327-345.
Similar books and articles
Nick Chater (1999). Why Biological Neuroscience Cannot Replace Psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):834-834.
Frank Jackson (1999). A Slightly Radical Neuron Doctrine. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):840-841.
Tony Stone & Martin Davies (2000). Autonomous Psychology and the Moderate Neuron Doctrine. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):849-850.
Ian Gold & Daniel Stoljar (1999). Interpreting Neuroscience and Explaining the Mind. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):856-866.
Alex Byrne (2000). Two Radical Neuron Doctrines. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):833-833.
Pavel E. Moroz (1980). A Hypothesis of the Code of Nerve Impulses. Acta Biotheoretica 29 (2):101-109.
Steven G. Daniel (1999). How Trivial is the “Trivial Neuron Doctrine”? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):834-835.
J. Tim O'Meara (1999). Begging the Question of Causation in a Critique of the Neuron Doctrine. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):846-846.
Joe Y. F. Lau (1999). A More Substantive Neuron Doctrine. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):843-844.
Barry Horwitz (1999). Neuron Doctrine: Trivial Versus Radical Versus Do Not Dichotomize. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):839-840.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads75 ( #41,788 of 1,725,607 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #64,853 of 1,725,607 )
How can I increase my downloads?