Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (1):80-81 (1997)
|Abstract||Although Clark & Thornton's “trading spaces” hypothesis is supposed to require trading internal representation for computation, it is not used consistently in that fashion. Not only do some of the offered computation-saving strategies turn out to be nonrepresentational, others (e.g., cultural artifacts) are external representations. Hence, C&T's hypothesis is consistent with antirepresentationalism.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Amir Horowitz (2007). Computation, External Factors, and Cognitive Explanations. Philosophical Psychology 20 (1):65-80.
John Dilworth (2004). Internal Versus External Representation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 62 (1):23-36.
J. Gregory Trafton, Susan B. Trickett & Farilee E. Mintz (2005). Connecting Internal and External Representations: Spatial Transformations of Scientific Visualizations. Foundations of Science 10 (1).
Brendan Kitts (1999). Representation Operators and Computation. Minds and Machines 9 (2):223-240.
Ronald L. Chrisley (1998). What Might Dynamical Intentionality Be, If Not Computation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):634-635.
B. Maclennan (2003). Transcending Turing Computability. Minds and Machines 13 (1):3-22.
Andy Clark & S. Thornton (1997). Trading Spaces: Computation, Representation, and the Limits of Uninformed Learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (1):57-66.
Andrew R. Bailey (1994). Representations Versus Regularities: Does Computation Require Representation? Eidos 12 (1):47-58.
M. A. (2003). A Quantum Computer Only Needs One Universe. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 34 (3):469-478.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #106,438 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?