David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 6 (1):33-46 (1996)
Vera & Simon (1993a) have argued that the theories and methods known as situated action or situativity theory are compatible with the assumptions and methodology of the physical symbol systems hypothesis and do not require a new approach to the study of cognition. When the central criterion of computational universality is added to the loose definition of a symbol system which Vera and Simon provide, it becomes apparent that there are important incompatibilities between the two approaches such that situativity theory cannot be subsumed within the symbol systems approach. Symbol systems and situativity theoretic approaches are, and should be seen to be, competing approaches to the study of cognition
|Keywords||Action Computation Machine Science Universal|
|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
Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides & John Tooby (eds.) (1992). The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. Oxford University Press.
Allen Newell (1990). Unified Theories of Cognition. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Angelo Cangelosi, Alberto Greco & Stevan Harnad (2002). Symbol Grounding and the Symbolic Theft Hypothesis. In A. Cangelosi & D. Parisi (eds.), Simulating the Evolution of Language. Springer-Verlag 191--210.
Stevan Harnad (1994). Computation is Just Interpretable Symbol Manipulation; Cognition Isn't. Minds and Machines 4 (4):379-90.
Stevan Harnad (1995). Grounding Symbols in Sensorimotor Categories with Neural Networks. Institute of Electrical Engineers Colloquium on "Grounding Representations.
Peter beim Graben (2004). Incompatible Implementations of Physical Symbol Systems. Mind and Matter 2 (2):29-51.
Michael Ramscar (2010). Computing Machinery and Understanding. Cognitive Science 34 (6):966-971.
Ronald L. Chrisley (1998). What Might Dynamical Intentionality Be, If Not Computation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):634-635.
Arthur B. Markman & Eric Dietrich, Something Old, Something New: Extending the Classical View of Representation.
Arthur B. Markman & Eric Dietrich (2000). Extending the Classical View of Representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (12):470-475.
Lawrence W. Barsalou (1999). Perceptions of Perceptual Symbols. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):637-660.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #174,748 of 1,934,518 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #113,162 of 1,934,518 )
How can I increase my downloads?