Search results for 'Systematicity' (try it on Scholar)

234 found
Order:
  1.  56
    Fernando Martinez-Manrique (2014). Systematicity and Conceptual Pluralism. In Paco Calvo John Symons (ed.), The Architecture of Cognition: Rethinking Fodor and Pylyshyn's Systematicity Challenge. MIT Press 305-334.
    The systematicity argument only challenges connectionism if systematicity is a general property of cognition. I examine this thesis in terms of properties of concepts. First, I propose that Evans's Generality Constraint only applies to attributions of belief. Then I defend a variety of conceptual pluralism, arguing that concepts share two fundamental properties related to centrality and belief-attribution, and contending that there are two kinds of concepts that differ in their compositional properties. Finally, I rely on Dual Systems Theory (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  12
    K. Brad Wray (forthcoming). Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. Synthese:1-14.
    Hoyningen-Huene develops an account of what science is, distinguishing it from common sense. According to Hoyningen-Huene, the key distinguishing feature is that science is more systematic. He identifies nine ways in which science is more systematic than common sense. I compare Hoyningen-Huene’s view to a view I refer to as the “Continuity Thesis.” The Continuity Thesis states that scientific knowledge is just an extension of common sense. This thesis is associated with Quine, Planck, and others. I argue that Hoyningen-Huene ultimately (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. James Blackmon, David Byrd, Robert C. Cummins, Pierre Poirier, Martin Roth & George Schwarz (2001). Systematicity and the Cognition of Structured Domains. Journal of Philosophy 98 (4):1-19.
    The current debate over systematicity concerns the formal conditions a scheme of mental representation must satisfy in order to explain the systematicity of thought.1 The systematicity of thought is assumed to be a pervasive property of minds, and can be characterized (roughly) as follows: anyone who can think T can think systematic variants of T, where the systematic variants of T are found by permuting T’s constituents. So, for example, it is an alleged fact that anyone who (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  4. Robert Cummins, James Blackmon, David Byrd, Pierre Poirier, Martin Roth & Georg Schwarz (2001). Systematicity and the Cognition of Structured Domains. Journal of Philosophy 98 (4):167 - 185.
    The current debate over systematicity concerns the formal conditions a scheme of mental representation must satisfy in order to explain the systematicity of thought.1 The systematicity of thought is assumed to be a pervasive property of minds, and can be characterized (roughly) as follows: anyone who can think T can think systematic variants of T, where the systematic variants of T are found by permuting T’s constituents. So, for example, it is an alleged fact that anyone who (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  5.  98
    Brian P. McLaughlin (2009). Systematicity Redux. Synthese 170 (2):251 - 274.
    One of the main challenges that Jerry Fodor and Zenon Pylyshyn (Cognition 28:3–71, 1988) posed for any connectionist theory of cognitive architecture is to explain the systematicity of thought without implementing a Language of Thought (LOT) architecture. The systematicity challenge presents a dilemma: if connectionism cannot explain the systematicity of thought, then it fails to offer an adequate theory of cognitive architecture; and if it explains the systematicity of thought by implementing a LOT architecture, then it (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  6.  17
    Mark Dingemanse, Damián E. Blasi, Gary Lupyan, Morten H. Christiansen & Padraic Monaghan (2015). Arbitrariness, Iconicity, and Systematicity in Language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19 (10):603-615.
    The notion that the form of a word bears an arbitrary relation to its meaning accounts only partly for the attested relations between form and meaning in the languages of the world. Recent research suggests a more textured view of vocabulary structure, in which arbitrariness is complemented by iconicity (aspects of form resemble aspects of meaning) and systematicity (statistical regularities in forms predict function). Experimental evidence suggests these form-to-meaning correspondences serve different functions in language processing, development, and communication: (...) facilitates category learning by means of phonological cues, iconicity facilitates word learning and communication by means of perceptuomotor analogies, and arbitrariness facilitates meaning individuation through distinctive forms. Processes of cultural evolution help to explain how these competing motivations shape vocabulary structure. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  26
    Shimon Edelman & Nathan Intrator (2003). Towards Structural Systematicity in Distributed, Statically Bound Visual Representations. Cognitive Science 23 (1):73-110.
    The problem of representing the spatial structure of images, which arises in visual object processing, is commonly described using terminology borrowed from propositional theories of cognition, notably, the concept of compositionality. The classical propositional stance mandates representations composed of symbols, which stand for atomic or composite entities and enter into arbitrarily nested relationships. We argue that the main desiderata of a representational system — productivity and systematicity — can (indeed, for a number of reasons, should) be achieved without recourse (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  8.  53
    Robert F. Hadley (2004). On the Proper Treatment of Semantic Systematicity. Minds and Machines 14 (2):145-172.
    The past decade has witnessed the emergence of a novel stance on semantic representation, and its relationship to context sensitivity. Connectionist-minded philosophers, including Clark and van Gelder, have espoused the merits of viewing hidden-layer, context-sensitive representations as possessing semantic content, where this content is partially revealed via the representations'' position in vector space. In recent work, Bodén and Niklasson have incorporated a variant of this view of semantics within their conception of semantic systematicity. Moreover, Bodén and Niklasson contend that (...)
    Direct download (19 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  9.  15
    Robert C. Cummins, James Blackmon & David Byrd (2005). What Systematicity Isn't. Journal of Philosophical Research 30:405-408.
    In “On Begging the Systematicity Question,” Wayne Davis criticizes the suggestion of Cummins et al. that the alleged systematicity of thought is not as obvious as is sometimes supposed, and hence not reliable evidence for the language of thought hypothesis. We offer a brief reply.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10.  31
    Wayne A. Davis (2005). On Begging the Systematicity Question. Journal of Philosophical Research 30:399-404.
    Robert Cummins has argued that Jerry Fodor’s well-known systematicity argument begs the question. I show that the systematicity argument for thought structure does not beg the question, nor run in either explanatory nor inferential circles, nor illegitimately project sentence structure onto thoughts. Because the evidence does not presuppose that thought has structure, connectionist explanations of the same interconnections between thoughts are at least possibilities. Butthey are likely to be ad hoc.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Robert C. Cummins (1996). Systematicity. Journal of Philosophy 93 (12):591-614.
  12.  89
    Kent Johnson (2004). On the Systematicity of Language and Thought. Journal of Philosophy 101 (3):111-139.
  13. Daniel Breazeale (2007). All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (4):665-667.
    Daniel Breazeale - All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism - Journal of the History of Philosophy 45:4 Journal of the History of Philosophy 45.4 665-667 Muse Search Journals This Journal Contents Reviewed by Daniel Breazeale University of Kentucky Paul W. Franks. All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005. Pp. viii + 440. Cloth, $49.95. Paul Franks' All or Nothing is in no sense an (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  47
    Kenneth Aizawa (2003). The Systematicity Arguments. Kluwer.
    The Systematicity Arguments is the only book-length treatment of the systematicity and productivity arguments.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  15. Andrew Chignell (2006). Beauty as a Symbol of Natural Systematicity. British Journal of Aesthetics 46 (4):406-415.
    I examine Kant's claim that a relation of symbolization links judgments of beauty and judgments of ‘systematicity’ in nature (that is, judgments concerning the ordering of natural forms under hierarchies of laws). My aim is to show that the symbolic relation between the two is, for Kant, much closer than many commentators think: it is not only the form but also the objects of some of our judgments of taste that symbolize the systematicity of nature. -/- .
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  15
    Mary Kate McGowan, Ilana Walder‐Biesanz, Morvareed Rezaian & Chloe Emerson (2016). On Silencing and Systematicity: The Challenge of the Drowning Case. Hypatia 31 (1):74-90.
    Silencing is a speech-related harm. We here focus on one particular account of silencing offered by Jennifer Hornsby and Rae Langton. According to this account, silencing is systematically generated, illocutionary-communicative failure. We here raise an apparent challenge to that account. In particular, we offer an example—the drowning case—that meets these conditions of silencing but does not intuitively seem to be an instance of it. First, we explore several conditions one might add to the Hornsby-Langton account, but we argue that none (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  25
    Robert J. Matthews (1994). Three-Concept Monte: Explanation, Implementation, and Systematicity. Synthese 101 (3):347-63.
    Fodor and Pylyshyn (1988), Fodor and McLaughlin (1990) and McLaughlin (1993) challenge connectionists to explain systematicity without simply implementing a classical architecture. In this paper I argue that what makes the challenge difficult for connectionists to meet has less to do with what is to be explained than with what is to count as an explanation. Fodor et al. are prepared to admit as explanatory, accounts of a sort that only classical models can provide. If connectionists are to meet (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  18. David J. Chalmers, Deep Systematicity and Connectionist Representation.
    1. I think that by emphasizing theoretical spaces of representations, Andy has put his finger on an issue that is key to connectionism's success, and whose investigation will be a key determinant of the field's further progress. I also think that if we look at representational spaces in the right way, we can see that they are deeply related to classical phenomenon of systematicity in representation. I want to argue that the key to understanding representational spaces, and in particular (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  41
    Robert F. Hadley & M. B. Hayward (1997). Strong Semantic Systematicity From Hebbian Connectionist Learning. Minds and Machines 7 (1):1-55.
    Fodor's and Pylyshyn's stand on systematicity in thought and language has been debated and criticized. Van Gelder and Niklasson, among others, have argued that Fodor and Pylyshyn offer no precise definition of systematicity. However, our concern here is with a learning based formulation of that concept. In particular, Hadley has proposed that a network exhibits strong semantic systematicity when, as a result of training, it can assign appropriate meaning representations to novel sentences (both simple and embedded) which (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  20.  7
    Víctor M. Verdejo (2012). Meeting the Systematicity Challenge Challenge. Journal of Philosophical Research 37:155-183.
    From Fodor and Pylyshyn’s celebrated 1988 systematicity argument in favour of a language of thought , a challenge to connectionist models arises in the form of a dilemma: either these models do not explain systematicity or they are implementations of LOT. From consideration of this challenge and of systematicity in domains other than language, defenders of connectionism have mounted a parallel systematicity argument against LOT which results in a new self-defeating dilemma, what I call here the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21.  69
    Lara Ostaric (2009). Kant's Account of Nature's Systematicity and the Unity of Theoretical and Practical Reason. Inquiry 52 (2):155 – 178.
    In this paper I argue that if one is to do justice to reason's unity in Kant, then one must acknowledge that reason's practical ends are presupposed in every theoretical investigation of nature. Thus, contrary to some other commentators, I contend that the notion of the metaphysical ground of the unity of nature should not be attributed to the “dynamics of reason” and its “own practical purposes.” Instead, the metaphysical ground of the unity of nature is in fact an indispensable (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  60
    Jürgen Schröder (1998). Knowledge of Rules, Causal Systematicity, and the Language of Thought. Synthese 117 (3):313 - 330.
    Martin Davies' criterion for the knowledge of implicit rules, viz. the causal systematicity of cognitive processes, is first exposed. Then the inference from causal systematicity of a process to syntactic properties of the input states is examined. It is argued that Davies' notion of a syntactic property is too weak to bear the conclusion that causal systematicity implies a language of thought as far as the input states are concerned. Next, it is shown that Davies' criterion leads (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  18
    Brian P. McLaughlin (1992). Systematicity, Conceptual Truth, and Evolution. Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences 34:217-234.
    Smolensky's (1995) proposal for a connectionist explanation of systematicity doesn't work.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24.  18
    Barbara C. Scholz (2007). Systematicity and Natural Language Syntax. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 7 (3):375-402.
    A lengthy debate in the philosophy of the cognitive sciences has turned on whether the phenomenon known as ‘systematicity’ of language and thought shows that connectionist explanatory aspirations are misguided. We investigate the issue of just which phenomenon ‘systematicity’ is supposed to be. The much-rehearsed examples always suggest that being systematic has something to do with ways in which some parts of expressions in natural languages (and, more conjecturally, some parts of thoughts) can be substituted for others without (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  19
    Rolf Ahlers (2005). Reinhold and Hegel on the Principle and Systematicity of Philosophy. Idealistic Studies 35 (2-3):215-253.
    In the United States the relationship between Hegel and Schelling divides into two camps: The first sees Hegel’s critical remarks in the Phenomenology not directed against Schelling himself but against Schelling’s adherents. I provide here detailed arguments for the minority view: Although Hegel did collaborate with Schelling in the early Jena years even opposing Reinhold, he nonetheless worked with Reinhold’s arguments on the origins and systematicity of philosophy differently than did Schelling: The rift between the two giants really goes (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  36
    Robert F. Hadley (1997). Explaining Systematicity: A Reply to Kenneth Aizawa. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 12 (4):571-79.
    In his discussion of results which I (with Michael Hayward) recently reported in this journal, Kenneth Aizawa takes issue with two of our conclusions, which are: (a) that our connectionist model provides a basis for explaining systematicity within the realm of sentence comprehension, and subject to a limited range of syntax (b) that the model does not employ structure-sensitive processing, and that this is clearly true in the early stages of the network''s training. Ultimately, Aizawa rejects both (a) and (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  2
    Víctor Verdejo (2015). The Systematicity Challenge to Anti-Representational Dynamicism. Synthese 192 (3):701-722.
    After more than twenty years of representational debate in the cognitive sciences, anti-representational dynamicism may be seen as offering a rival and radically new kind of explanation of systematicity phenomena. In this paper, I argue that, on the contrary, anti-representational dynamicism must face a version of the old systematicity challenge: either it does not explain systematicity, or else, it is just an implementation of representational theories. To show this, I present a purely behavioral and representation-free account of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  15
    S. Phillips & G. S. Halford, Systematicity: Psychological Evidence with Connectionist Implications.
    At root, the systematicity debate over classical versus connectionist explanations for cognitive architecture turns on quantifying the degree to which human cognition is systematic. We introduce into the debate recent psychological data that provides strong support for the purely structure-based generalizations claimed by Fodor and Pylyshyn (1988). We then show, via simulation, that two widely used connectionist models (feedforward and simple recurrent networks) do not capture the same degree of generalization as human subjects. However, we show that this limitation (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  7
    Angela Schwering & Kai-Uwe Kühnberger (2008). Child Versus Adult Analogy: The Role of Systematicity and Abstraction in Analogy Models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (4):395-396.
    The target article develops a computational connectionist model for analogy-making from a developmental perspective and evaluates this model using simple analogies. Our commentary critically reviews the advantages and limits of this approach, in particular with respect to its expressive power, its capability to generalize across analogous structure and analyze systematicity in analogies.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  19
    Paco Calvo & John Symons (eds.) (2014). The Architecture of Cognition: Rethinking Fodor and Pylyshyn's Systematicity Challenge. The MIT Press.
    Philosophers and cognitive scientists reassess systematicity in the post-connectionist era, offering perspectives from ecological psychology, embodied and distributed cognition, enactivism, and other methodologies.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  1
    Paul Hoyningen-Huene (2016). Systematicity: The Nature of Science. Oxford University Press Usa.
    In Systematicity, Paul Hoyningen-Huene answers the question "What is science?" by proposing that scientific knowledge is primarily distinguished from other forms of knowledge, especially everyday knowledge, by being more systematic. "Science" is here understood in the broadest possible sense, encompassing not only the natural sciences but also mathematics, the social sciences, and the humanities. The author develops his thesis in nine dimensions in which it is claimed that science is more systematic than other forms of knowledge: regarding descriptions, explanations, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Jerry A. Fodor & Brian P. McLaughlin (1990). Connectionism and the Problem of Systematicity: Why Smolensky's Solution Doesn't Work. Cognition 35 (2):183-205.
  33.  65
    Paul Franks (2005). All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism. Harvard University Press.
    In this work, the first overview of the German Idealism that is both conceptual and methodological, Paul W. Franks offers a philosophical reconstruction that is...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  34. Elisabeth Camp (2009). Putting Thoughts to Work: Concepts, Systematicity, and Stimulus-Independence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):275-311.
    I argue that we can reconcile two seemingly incompatible traditions for thinking about concepts. On the one hand, many cognitive scientists assume that the systematic redeployment of representational abilities suffices for having concepts. On the other hand, a long philosophical tradition maintains that language is necessary for genuinely conceptual thought. I argue that on a theoretically useful and empirically plausible concept of 'concept', it is necessary and sufficient for conceptual thought that a thinker be able to entertain many of the (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  35.  86
    N. V. Motroshilova (1999). The Principle of Systematicity in Hegel's Science of Logic. Russian Studies in Philosophy 38 (1):9-27.
    Hegel's Science of Logic is a unique intellectual center of the philosopher's development. In a sense everything that he had done previously was used in his search for a logical principle and in shaping a system of logic and everything he wrote later brought out the theoretical elements that it implicitly contained.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  2
    Dedre Gentner & Cecile Toupin (1986). Systematicity and Surface Similarity in the Development of Analogy. Cognitive Science 10 (3):277-300.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   28 citations  
  37.  25
    Darrell Rowbottom, Book Review : Systematicity: The Nature of Science. [REVIEW]
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  21
    Carrie Ann Theisen, Jon Oberlander & Simon Kirby (2010). Systematicity and Arbitrariness in Novel Communication Systems. Interaction Studies 11 (1):14-32.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  39.  21
    Sasha Mudd, The Demand for Systematicity and the Authority of Theoretical Reason in Kant.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  26
    Robert F. Hadley (1994). Systematicity in Connectionist Language Learning. Mind and Language 9 (3):247-72.
  41.  29
    Paul Guyer (2003). Kant on the Systematicity of Nature: Two Puzzles. History of Philosophy Quarterly 20 (3):277 - 295.
  42. Jerry A. Fodor (1997). Connectionism and the Problem of Systematicity (Continued): Why Smolensky's Solution Still Doesn't Work. Cognition 62 (1):109-19.
  43.  65
    Paul Guyer (1990). Reason and Reflective Judgment: Kant on the Significance of Systematicity. Noûs 24 (1):17-43.
  44.  73
    W. F. G. Haselager & J. F. H. Van Rappard (1998). Connectionism, Systematicity, and the Frame Problem. Minds and Machines 8 (2):161-179.
    This paper investigates connectionism's potential to solve the frame problem. The frame problem arises in the context of modelling the human ability to see the relevant consequences of events in a situation. It has been claimed to be unsolvable for classical cognitive science, but easily manageable for connectionism. We will focus on a representational approach to the frame problem which advocates the use of intrinsic representations. We argue that although connectionism's distributed representations may look promising from this perspective, doubts can (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  45.  5
    Catherine A. Clement & Dedre Gentner (1991). Systematicity as a Selection Constraint in Analogical Mapping. Cognitive Science 15 (1):89-132.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  46.  12
    Matteo Colombo (2015). The Architecture of Cognition: Rethinking Fodor and Pylyshyn’s Systematicity Challenge. Philosophical Psychology 29 (3):476-478.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  7
    Travis Dumsday (2015). Systematicity: The Nature of Science. [REVIEW] Review of Metaphysics 69 (2):389-391.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  18
    Martin Carrier (2015). Systematizität: Eine systematische Charakterisierung der Wissenschaft? Kommentar zu Paul Hoyningen-Huenes Systematicity. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 69 (2):230-234.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  15
    Oliver R. Scholz (2015). Wissenschaft, Systematizität und Methoden Anmerkungen zu Paul Hoyningen-Huenes Systematicity. The Nature of Science. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 69 (2):235-242.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  64
    Jacqueline Mariña (2007). All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments, and Skepticism in German Idealism by Paul W. Franks. [REVIEW] Zeitschrift für Neuere Theologiegeschichte/Journal for the History of Modern Theology 14 (1):145-149.
1 — 50 / 234