From Searle’s Chinese room to the mathematics classroom: technical and cognitive mathematics

Studies in Philosophy and Education 26 (2):127-146 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Employing Searle’s views, I begin by arguing that students of Mathematics behave similarly to machines that manage symbols using a set of rules. I then consider two types of Mathematics, which I call Cognitive Mathematics and Technical Mathematics respectively. The former type relates to concepts and meanings, logic and sense, whilst the latter relates to algorithms, heuristics, rules and application of various techniques. I claim that an upgrade in the school teaching of Cognitive Mathematics is necessary. The aim is to change the current mentality of the stakeholders so as to compensate for the undue value presently attached to Technical Mathematics, due to advances in technology and its applications, and thus render the two sides of Mathematics equal. Furthermore, I suggest a reorganization/systematization of School Mathematics into a cognitive network to facilitate students’ understanding of the subject. The final goal is the transition from mechanical execution of rules to better understanding and in-depth knowledge of Mathematics.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A cognitive analysis of the chinese room argument.Norman Y. Teng - 2000 - Philosophical Psychology 13 (3):313-24.
A note on the chinese room.Hanoch Ben-Yami - 1993 - Synthese 95 (2):169-72.
Searle's arguments against cognitive science.Ned Block - 2003 - In John M. Preston & Michael A. Bishop (eds.), Views Into the Chinese Room: New Essays on Searle and Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press. pp. 70--79.
The chinese room argument: Consciousness and understanding.Simone Gozzano - 1997 - In Matjaz Gams, M. Paprzycki & X. Wu (eds.), Mind Versus Computer: Were Dreyfus and Winograd Right? Amsterdam: IOS Press. pp. 43--231.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-08-28

Downloads
48 (#316,781)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
Minds, Brains and Science.John R. Searle - 1984 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Minds, Brains, and Programs.John Searle - 1980 - In John Heil (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. Oxford University Press.
The mathematical experience.Philip J. Davis - 1981 - Boston: Birkhäuser. Edited by Reuben Hersh & Elena Marchisotto.

View all 22 references / Add more references