Reply to Clark and Van gelder
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Clark ends his appendix with a description of what he calls "dynamic computationalism", which he describes as an interesting hybrid between DST and GOFAI. My 'horseLISP" example could be described as an example of dynamic computationalism. It is clearly not as eliminativist as Van Gelder's computational governor example, for I am trying to come up with something like identities between computational entities and dynamic ones. Thus unlike other dynamicists, I am not doing what Clark calls "embracing a different vocabulary for the understanding and analysis of brain events". I think we probably can keep much of the computational vocabulary, although the meanings of many of its terms will probably shift as much as the meaning of 'atom' has shifted since Dalton's time. The label of "dynamic computationalism" is perhaps as good a description of my position as any, but I think I would mean something slightly different by it than Clark would. (For the following, please insert the mantra "of course, this is an empirical question" (OCTEQ) every paragraph or so.)
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Gerard O'Brien (1998). Digital Computers Versus Dynamical Systems: A Conflation of Distinctions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):648-649.
Gerard O’Brien (1998). Digital Computers Versus Dynamical Systems: A Conflation of Distinctions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):648-649.
Chris Eliasmith (1998). Dynamical Models and Van Gelder's Dynamicism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):639-639.
Ronald L. Chrisley (1998). What Might Dynamical Intentionality Be, If Not Computation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):634-635.
Manuel Garcia-Carpintero (1996). Two Spurious Varieties of Compositionality. Minds and Machines 6 (2):159-72.
Chris Eliasmith (1997). Computation and Dynamical Models of Mind. Minds and Machines 7 (4):531-41.
Tim van Gelder (1995). What Might Cognition Be If Not Computation? Journal of Philosophy 92 (7):345-81.
Gregory R. Mulhauser (1998). Nature's Subtlety Undermines the Empirical Relevance of Both Dynamical and Computational Hypotheses. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):646-647.
Joseph Ulric Neisser (1999). On the Use and Abuse of Dasein in Cognitive Science. The Monist 82 (2):347-361.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #148,577 of 1,781,221 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #207,153 of 1,781,221 )
How can I increase my downloads?