Graduate studies at Western
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):607-609 (2003)
|Abstract||I have three types of interrelated comments. First, on the choice of the proposed criteria, I argue against any list and for a system of criteria. Second, on grading, I suggest modifications with respect to consciousness and development. Finally, on the choice of “theories” for evaluation, I argue for Edelman's theory of neuronal group selection instead of connectionism (classical or not).|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Brown Grier (1975). Prediction, Explanation, and Testability as Criteria for Judging Statistical Theories. Philosophy of Science 42 (4):373-383.
David Davies (1998). McAllister's Aesthetics in Science: A Critical Notice. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (1):25 – 32.
James W. Mcallister (1989). Truth and Beauty in Scientific Reason. Synthese 78 (1):25 - 51.
Michael A. Slote (1969). Free Will, Determinism, and the Theory of Important Criteria. Inquiry 12 (1-4):317-38.
John R. Anderson & Christian Lebiere (2003). The Newell Test for a Theory of Cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):587-601.
Ann E. Cudd (2005). How to Explain Oppression: Criteria of Adequacy for Normative Explanatory Theories. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (1):20-49.
Sashank Varma (2011). Criteria for the Design and Evaluation of Cognitive Architectures. Cognitive Science 35 (7):1329-1351.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #189,291 of 739,370 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,370 )
How can I increase my downloads?