Graduate studies at Western
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):639-639 (1998)
|Abstract||Van Gelder has presented a position which he ties closely to a broad class of models known as dynamical models. While supporting many of his broader claims about the importance of this class (as has been argued by connectionists for quite some time), I note that there are a number of unique characteristics of his brand of dynamicism. I suggest that these characteristics engender difficulties for his view|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gerard O.’Brien (1998). Digital Computers Versus Dynamical Systems: A Conflation of Distinctions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):648-649.
Gregory R. Mulhauser (1998). Nature's Subtlety Undermines the Empirical Relevance of Both Dynamical and Computational Hypotheses. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):646-647.
Randall D. Beer (1998). Framing the Debate Between Computational and Dynamical Approaches to Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):630-630.
Ronald L. Chrisley (1998). What Might Dynamical Intentionality Be, If Not Computation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):634-635.
Michael Wheeler (1998). An Appeal for Liberalism, or Why Van Gelder's Notion of a Dynamical System is Too Narrow for Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):653-654.
Terence Horgan & John Tienson (1998). Resisting the Tyranny of Terminology: The General Dynamical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):643-643.
Bruce Bridgeman (1998). The Dynamical Model is a Perceptron. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):631-632.
Chris Eliasmith (1997). Computation and Dynamical Models of Mind. Minds and Machines 7 (4):531-41.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #62,807 of 738,687 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,701 of 738,687 )
How can I increase my downloads?