What kind of explanation, if any, is a connectionist net?
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Connectionist models of cognition are all the rage these days. They are said to provide better explanations than traditional symbolic computational models in a wide array of cognitive areas, from perception to memory to language to reasoning to motor action. But what does it actually mean to say that they "explain" cognition at all? In what sense do the dozens of nodes and hundreds of connections in a typical connectionist network explain anything? It is the purpose of this paper to explore this question in light of traditional accounts of what it is to be an explanation. We start with an impossibly brief review of some historically important theories of explanation. We then discuss several currently-popular approaches to the question of how connectionist models explain cognition. Third, we describe a theory of causation by philosopher Stephen Yablo that solves some of the problems on which we think many accounts of connectionist explanation founder. Finally, we apply Yablo's theory to these accounts, and show how several important issues surrounding them seem to disappear into thin air in its presence.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Alistair Isaac & Jakub Szymanik (2010). Logic in Cognitive Science: Bridging the Gap Between Symbolic and Connectionist Paradigms. Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research (2):279-309.
Ron Sun (1999). Accounting for the Computational Basis of Consciousness: A Connectionist Approach. Consciousness and Cognition 8 (4):529-565.
S. Phillips (1998). Are Feedforward and Recurrent Networks Systematic? Analysis and Implications for a Connectionist Cognitive Architecture. .
Robert C. Cummins (1991). The Role of Representation in Connectionist Explanation of Cognitive Capacities. In William Ramsey, Stephen P. Stich & D. Rumelhart (eds.), Philosophy and Connectionist Theory. Lawrence Erlbaum.
John Hawthorne (1989). On the Compatibility of Connectionist and Classical Models. Philosophical Psychology 2 (1):5-16.
Jonathan Opie (1998). Connectionist Modelling Strategies. Psycoloquy 9 (30).
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads45 ( #29,007 of 739,352 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?