Are Computational Transitions Sensitive to Semantics?
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):703-721 (2012)
| Abstract | The formal conception of computation (FCC) holds that computational processes are not sensitive to semantic properties. FCC is popular, but it faces well-known difficulties. Accordingly, authors such as Block and Peacocke pursue a ?semantically-laden? alternative, according to which computation can be sensitive to semantics. I argue that computation is insensitive to semantics within a wide range of computational systems, including any system with ?derived? rather than ?original? intentionality. FCC yields the correct verdict for these systems. I conclude that there is only one promising strategy for semantically-laden theorists: identify special computational systems that help generate their own semantic properties, and then show that computation within those systems is semantically-laden. Unfortunately, the few existing discussions that pursue this strategy are problematic | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesMichael Rescorla (forthcoming). Against Structuralist Theories of Computational Implementation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
Murat Aydede (2000). Computation and Intentional Psychology. Dialogue 39 (2):365-379.
Eric Dietrich (1989). Semantics and the Computational Paradigm in Computational Psychology. Synthese 79 (April):119-41.
Rick Grush (2001). The Semantic Challenge to Computational Neuroscience. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Amir Horowitz (2007). Computation, External Factors, and Cognitive Explanations. Philosophical Psychology 20 (1):65-80.
Gualtiero Piccinini (2008). Computation Without Representation. Philosophical Studies 137 (2):205-241.
David J. Chalmers (2011). A Computational Foundation for the Study of Cognition. Journal of Cognitive Science 12 (4):323-357.
Chris Fox (2005). Foundations of Intensional Semantics. Blackwell Pub..
Matthew Stuart Piper (2012). You Can't Eat Causal Cake with an Abstract Fork: An Argument Against Computational Theories of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 19 (11-12):154-90.
Mary Litch (1997). Computation, Connectionism and Modelling the Mind. Philosophical Psychology 10 (3):357-364.
Michael Losonsky (1995). Emdedded Systems Vs. Individualism. Minds and Machines 5 (3):357-71.
Gordana Dodig Crnkovic & Mark Burgin (eds.) (forthcoming). INFORMATION AND COMPUTATION. World Scientific.
Aaron Sloman (1996). Beyond Turing Equivalence. In Peter Millican Andy Clark (ed.), Machines and Thought The Legacy of Alan Turing.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-10-06Total downloads17 ( #71,101 of 549,088 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,088 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
