David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 8 (2):161-179 (1998)
This paper investigates connectionism's potential to solve the frame problem. The frame problem arises in the context of modelling the human ability to see the relevant consequences of events in a situation. It has been claimed to be unsolvable for classical cognitive science, but easily manageable for connectionism. We will focus on a representational approach to the frame problem which advocates the use of intrinsic representations. We argue that although connectionism's distributed representations may look promising from this perspective, doubts can be raised about the potential of distributed representations to allow large amounts of complexly structured information to be adequately encoded and processed. It is questionable whether connectionist models that are claimed to effectively represent structured information can be scaled up to a realistic extent. We conclude that the frame problem provides a difficulty to connectionism that is no less serious than the obstacle it constitutes for classical cognitive science.
|Keywords||Connectionism Frame Mind Science System|
|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
Shannon Spaulding (2010). Embodied Cognition and Mindreading. Mind and Language 25 (1):119-140.
Richard Samuels (2010). Classical Computationalism and the Many Problems of Cognitive Relevance. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):280-293.
Stefan L. Frank, Willem F. G. Haselager & Iris van Rooij (2009). Connectionist Semantic Systematicity. Cognition 110 (3):358-379.
Iris Rooij, Raoul M. Bongers & F. G. Haselager (2002). A Non‐Representational Approach to Imagined Action. Cognitive Science 26 (3):345-375.
Similar books and articles
Keith Butler (1995). Representation and Computation in a Deflationary Assessment of Connectionist Cognitive Science. Synthese 104 (1):71-97.
Tim van Gelder (1991). Classical Questions, Radical Answers. In Terence E. Horgan & John L. Tienson (eds.), Connectionism and the Philosophy of Mind. Kluwer.
David McFarland (1992). Animals as Cost-Based Robots. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6 (2):133 – 153.
Jerry A. Fodor & Zenon W. Pylyshyn (1988). Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture. Cognition 28 (1-2):3-71.
Georges Rey (1991). An Explanatory Budget for Connectionism and Eliminativism. In Terence E. Horgan & John L. Tienson (eds.), Connectionism and the Philosophy of Mind. Kluwer. 219--240.
Patrick Anselme & Robert M. French (1999). Interactively Converging on Context-Sensitive Representations: A Solution to the Frame Problem. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 53 (209):365-385.
Scott Hendricks (2006). The Frame Problem and Theories of Belief. Philosophical Studies 129 (2):317-33.
Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (2009). What Does the Frame Problem Tell Us About Moral Normativity? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (1):25 - 51.
Terence E. Horgan & John L. Tienson (1991). Structured Representations in Connectionist Systems? In S. Davis (ed.), Connectionism: Theorye and Practice. Oup.
Mark Sprevak (2005). The Frame Problem and the Treatment of Prediction. In L. Magnani & R. Dossena (eds.), Computing, Philosophy and Cognition. 4--349.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #35,589 of 1,099,863 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #303,846 of 1,099,863 )
How can I increase my downloads?