Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 155 (1):117-131 (2011)
|Abstract||Representation is central to contemporary theorizing about the mind/brain. But the nature of representation--both in the mind/brain and more generally--is a source of ongoing controversy. One way of categorizing representational types is to distinguish between the analog and the digital: the received view is that analog representations vary smoothly, while digital representations vary in a step-wise manner. I argue that this characterization is inadequate to account for the ways in which representation is used in cognitive science; in its place, I suggest an alternative taxonomy. I will defend and extend David Lewis's account of analog and digital representation, distinguishing analog from continuous representation, as well as digital from discrete representation. I will argue that the distinctions available in this four-fold account accord with representational features of theoretical interest in cognitive science more usefully than the received analog/digital dichotomy.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John Haugeland (1981). Analog and Analog. Philosophical Topics 12 (1):213-226.
William Demopoulos (1987). On Some Fundamental Distinctions of Computationalism. Synthese 70 (January):79-96.
Bruce J. MacLennan (1994). Words Lie in Our Way. Minds and Machines 4 (4):421-37.
Eric Dietrich & A. Markman (2003). Discrete Thoughts: Why Cognition Must Use Discrete Representations. Mind and Language 18 (1):95-119.
Russell Trenholme (1994). Analog Simulation. Philosophy of Science 61 (1):115-131.
Matthew Katz (2008). Analog and Digital Representation. Minds and Machines 18 (3):403-408.
Added to index2009-02-04
Total downloads101 ( #7,742 of 740,542 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,533 of 740,542 )
How can I increase my downloads?