David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):94-102 (2012)
The commentators expressed concerns regarding the relevance and value of non-computational non-symbolic explanations of cognitive performance. But what counts as an “explanation” depends on the pre-theoretical assumptions behind the scenes of empirical science regarding the kinds of variables and relationships that are sought out in the first place, and some of the present disagreements stem from incommensurate assumptions. Traditional cognitive science presumes cognition to be a decomposable system of components interacting according to computational rules to generate cognitive performances (i.e., component-dominant dynamics). We assign primacy to interaction-dominant dynamics among components. Though either choice can be a good guess before the fact, the primacy of interactions is now supported by much recent empirical work in cognitive science. Consequently, in the main, the commentators have failed so far to address the growing evidence corroborating the theory-driven predictions of complexity science
|Keywords||Computation Interaction‐dominance Universality Explanation Complexity|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Guy van Orden & Damian G. Stephen (2012). Is Cognitive Science Usefully Cast as Complexity Science? Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):3-6.
William H. Alexander & Joshua W. Brown (2010). Computational Models of Performance Monitoring and Cognitive Control. Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (4):658-677.
Robert A. Wilson & Lucia Foglia (2011). Embodied Cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Pauli Brattico (2010). Recursion Hypothesis Considered as a Research Program for Cognitive Science. Minds and Machines 20 (2):213-241.
Dustin Stokes (2009). Aesthetics and Cognitive Science. Philosophy Compass 4 (5):715-733.
B. Franks (1999). Discussion. Idealizations, Competence and Explanation: A Response to Patterson. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (4):735-746.
Andrew Howes (2012). Useful Theories Make Predictions. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):84-86.
James A. Dixon, John G. Holden, Daniel Mirman & Damian G. Stephen (2012). Multifractal Dynamics in the Emergence of Cognitive Structure. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):51-62.
Jesse M. Bering (2006). The Cognitive Science of Souls: Clarifications and Extensions of the Evolutionary Model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (5):486-493.
Ronald N. Giere (1990). Implications of the Cognitive Sciences for the Philosophy of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:419 - 430.
Martin Davies (2010). Double Dissociation: Understanding its Role in Cognitive Neuropsychology. Mind and Language 25 (5):500-540.
Keith Stenning & Jon Oberlander (1997). A Cognitive Theory of Graphical and Linguistic Reasoning: Logic and Implementation. Cognitive Science. .
W. H. Dittrich (1994). Cognition for Science? Book Review of Giere on Scientific Cognition. [Journal (on-Line/Unpaginated)].
Added to index2011-11-11
Total downloads6 ( #160,010 of 1,004,657 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,617 of 1,004,657 )
How can I increase my downloads?