Abstract
In the late 1980s, there were many who heralded the emergence of connectionism as a new paradigm – one which would eventually displace the classically symbolic methods then dominant in AI and Cognitive Science. At present, there remain influential connectionists who continue to defend connectionism as a more realistic paradigm for modeling cognition, at all levels of abstraction, than the classical methods of AI. Not infrequently, one encounters arguments along these lines: given what we know about neurophysiology, it is just not plausible to suppose that our brains are digital computers. Thus, they could not support a classical architecture. I argue here for a middle ground between connectionism and classicism. I assume, for argument's sake, that some form(s) of connectionism can provide reasonably approximate models – at least for lower-level cognitive processes. Given this assumption, I argue on theoretical and empirical grounds that most human mental skills must reside in separate connectionist modules or ‘sub-networks’. Ultimately, it is argued that the basic tenets of connectionism, in conjunction with the fact that humans often employ novel combinations of skill modules in rule following and problem solving, lead to the plausible conclusion that, in certain domains, high level cognition requires some form of classical architecture. During the course of argument, it emerges that only an architecture with classical structure could support the novel patterns of information flow and interaction that would exist among the relevant set of modules. Such a classical architecture might very well reside in the abstract levels of a hybrid system whose lower-level modules are purely connectionist.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berkeley, I.S.N. (1997), On Connectionism, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Churchland, P.S. and Sejnowski, T.J. (1992), The Compulational Brain, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Clark, A. (1989), Microcognition: Philosophy, Cognitive Science, and Parallel Distributed Processing, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Elman, J.L., Bates, E.A., Johnson, M.H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. and Plunkett, K. (1996), Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fodor, J.A. (1983), The Modoularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology, Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Fodor, J.A. and Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1988), ‘Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture: A Critical Analysis’, Cognition 28, pp. 3–71.
Hadley, R.F. (1993), ‘Connectionism, Explicit Rules, and Symbolic Manipulation’, Minds and Machines 3, pp. 183–200.
Hadley, R.F. (1994a), ‘Systematicity in Connectionist Language Learning’, Minds and Language 9, pp. 247–272.
Hadley, R.F. (1994b), ‘Systematicity Revisited: Reply to Christiansen and Chater and Niklasson and van Gelder’, Mind and Language 9, pp. 431–444.
Hadley, R.F. (1995), ‘The Explicit-Implicit Distinction’, Mind and Machines 5, pp. 219–242.
Hadley, R.F. (1997), Cognition, Systematicity and Nomic Necessity, Mind and Language 12, pp. 137–153.
Hadley, R.F. and Hayward, M.B. (1997), ‘Strong Semantic Systematicity from Hebbian Connectionist Learning’, Minds and Machines 7, pp. 1–37.
Hadley, R.F. and Cardei, V. (in press) ‘Language Acquisiton from Sparse Input and No Error Feedback’, Neural Networks.
Haugeland, J. (1985), Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Holyoak, K. and Thagard, P. (1989), ‘Analogical Mapping by Constraint Satisfaction’, Cognitive Science 13, pp. 295–355.
Kosslyn, S. and Koenig, O. (1992), Wet Mind: The New Cognitive Neuroscience, NewYork,NY: The Free Press.
Ling, X. (1994), ‘Learning the Past Tense of English Verbs: the Symbolic Pattern Associator vs. Connectionist Models’, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 1, pp. 209–229.
Marcus, G.F. (1998), ‘Rethinking Eliminative Connectionism’, Cognitive Psychology, 37(3). 221
Niklasson, L.F. and van Gelder, T. (1994), ‘On Being Systematically Connectionist’, Mind and Language 9, pp. 288–302.
Pallas, S.L. and Sur, M. (1993), ‘Visual Projections Induced into the Auditory Pathways of Ferrets: II. Corticocortical Connections of Primary Auditory Cortex’, Journal of Comparative Neurology 337, pp. 317–333.
Peterson, S.E., Fiez, J.A. and Corbetta, M. (1991), ‘Neuroimaging’, Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2, pp. 217–222.
Pollack, J.B. (1990), ‘Recursive Distributed Representations’, Artificial Intelligence 46, pp. 77–105.
Rypma, B., Prabhakaran, V., Smith, J.A.L., Desmond, J.E., Glover, G.H. and Gabrieli, J.D.E. (1997), Neural Correlates of Mathematical Reasoning: an fMRI Study of Word-Problem Solving, Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shastri, L. and Ajjanagadde, V. (1993), ‘From Simple Associations to Systematic Reasoning: A Connectionist Representation of Rules, Variables and Dynamic Bindings Using Temporal Synchrony’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, pp. 417–451.
Smolensky, P. (1988), ‘On the Proper Treatment of Connectionism,’ Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11, pp. 1–23.
Smolensky, P. (1995), ‘Constituent Structure and Explanation in an Integrated Connectionist/ Symbolic Cognitive Architecture’, in C. Macdonald and G. Macdonald eds. Connectionism: Debates on Psychological Explanation, Oxford: Blackwell.
Sommerville, I. (1996), Software Engineering, 5th Edition, New York: Addison-Wesley.
Sur, M., Pallas, S.L. and Roe, A.W. (1990), ‘Cross-modal Plasticity in Cortical Development: Differentiation and Specification of Sensory Neocortex’, Trends in Neuroscience 13, pp. 227–233.
Touretzky, D.S. and Hinton, G.E. (1988), 'A Distributed Connectionist Production System, Cognitive Science 12, pp. 423–466.
van Gelder, T. (1990), ‘Compositionality: A Connectionist Variation on a Classical Theme’ Cognitive Science 14, pp. 355–384.
van Gelder, T. (1995), ‘It's About Time’, in R. Port, and T. van Gelder, (eds.), Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hadley, R.F. Connectionism and Novel Combinations of Skills: Implications for Cognitive Architecture. Minds and Machines 9, 197–221 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008347616489
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008347616489