David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 79 (April):119-41 (1989)
There is a prevalent notion among cognitive scientists and philosophers of mind that computers are merely formal symbol manipulators, performing the actions they do solely on the basis of the syntactic properties of the symbols they manipulate. This view of computers has allowed some philosophers to divorce semantics from computational explanations. Semantic content, then, becomes something one adds to computational explanations to get psychological explanations. Other philosophers, such as Stephen Stich, have taken a stronger view, advocating doing away with semantics entirely. This paper argues that a correct account of computation requires us to attribute content to computational processes in order to explain which functions are being computed. This entails that computational psychology must countenance mental representations. Since anti-semantic positions are incompatible with computational psychology thus construed, they ought to be rejected. Lastly, I argue that in an important sense, computers are not formal symbol manipulators
|Keywords||Computer Mental States Metaphysics Psychology Semantics Symbol|
|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
Robert C. Cummins (1975). Functional Analysis. Journal of Philosophy 72 (November):741-64.
Michael Devitt (1981). Designation. Columbia University Press.
Fred Dretske (1985). Machines and the Mental. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 59 (1):23-33.
Citations of this work BETA
Gualtiero Piccinini (2008). Computation Without Representation. Philosophical Studies 137 (2):205-241.
Nir Fresco (2010). Explaining Computation Without Semantics: Keeping It Simple. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 20 (2):165-181.
Michael Rescorla (2012). Are Computational Transitions Sensitive to Semantics? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):703-721.
Similar books and articles
Rick Grush (2001). The Semantic Challenge to Computational Neuroscience. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press. 155--172.
Margaret A. Boden (1988). Computer Models On Mind: Computational Approaches In Theoretical Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Lawrence A. Shapiro (1997). A Clearer Vision. Philosophy of Science 64 (1):131-53.
Vinod Goel (1991). Notationality and the Information Processing Mind. Minds and Machines 1 (2):129-166.
Michael Losonsky (1995). Emdedded Systems Vs. Individualism. Minds and Machines 5 (3):357-71.
Patrick Blackburn (2005). Representation and Inference for Natural Language: A First Course in Computational Semantics. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Ausonio Marras (1985). The Churchlands on Methodological Solipsism and Computational Psychology. Philosophy of Science 52 (June):295-309.
J. Christopher Maloney (1985). Methodological Solipsism Reconsidered as a Research Strategy in Cognitive Psychology. Philosophy of Science 52 (September):451-69.
Murat Aydede (2000). Computation and Intentional Psychology. Dialogue 39 (2):365-379.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #84,909 of 1,140,200 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #142,694 of 1,140,200 )
How can I increase my downloads?