Graduate studies at Western
Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):493-507 (2008)
|Abstract||Are learning processes selection processes? This paper takes a slightly modified version of the account of selection presented in Hull et al. (Behav Brain Sci 24:511–527, 2001) and asks whether it applies to learning processes. The answer is that although some learning processes are selectional, many are not. This has consequences for teleological theories of mental content. According to these theories, mental states have content in virtue of having proper functions, and they have proper functions in virtue of being the products of selection processes. For some mental states, it is plausible that the relevant selection process is natural selection, but there are many for which it is not plausible. One response to this (due to David Papineau) is to suggest that the learning processes by which we acquire non-innate mental states are selection processes and can therefore confer proper functions on mental states. This paper considers two ways in which this response could be elaborated, and argues that neither of them succeed: the teleosemanticist cannot rely on the claim that learning processes are selection processes in order to justify the attribution of proper functions to beliefs.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Bence Nanay (2001). A More Pluralist Typology of Selection Processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):547-548.
Adolf Heschl (2001). Natural Selection and Metaphors of “Selection”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):539-540.
Peter Godfrey-Smith (2001). The Role of Information and Replication in Selection Processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):538-538.
David L. Hull & Sigrid S. Glenn (2004). Multiply Concurrent Replication. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (6):902-904.
David L. Hull, Rodney E. Langman & Sigrid S. Glenn (2001). At Last: Serious Consideration. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):559-569.
R. Goode & P. E. Griffiths (1995). The Misuse of Sober's Selection for/Selection of Distinction. Biology and Philosophy 10 (1):99-108.
B. Nanay (2002). The Return of the Replicator: What is Philosophically Signiﬁcant in a General Account of Replication and Selection? [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy:109-121.
Ralph Spiga (2001). Selection: Information and Replication of the Operant. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):556-557.
Julian C. Leslie (2001). Selection in Operant Learning May Fit a General Model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):542-543.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #68,365 of 739,053 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,053 )
How can I increase my downloads?