Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):783-784 (2000)
AbstractThree arguments are given to show that neural constructivism lacks an essential ingredient to explain cognitive development. Based on results in the theory of adaptive signal analysis, adaptive biological pattern information and self-organization in nonlinear systems of information processing, it is concluded that neural constructivism should be further extended to accommodate the occurrence of phase transitions generating qualitative development in the sense of Piaget.
Similar books and articles
Optimality in Biological and Artificial Networks?Daniel S. Levine & Wesley R. Elsberry (eds.) - 1997 - Lawrence Erlbaum.
From neural constructivism to children's cognitive development: Bridging the gap.Denis Mareschal & Thomas R. Shultz - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):571-572.
Organizing the brain's diversities.Michael A. Arbib & Peter Érdi - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):551-565.
From neural constructivism to cognitive constructivism: The steps to be taken.Andreas Demetriou - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):781-782.
Dynamical learning algorithms for neural networks and neural constructivism.Enrico Blanzieri - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):559-559.
Multiple personalities and views of neural organization.Rolf Kötter - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):545-546.
Information processing in neural networks by means of controlled dynamic regimes.François Chapeau-Blondeau - 1995 - Acta Biotheoretica 43 (1-2):155-167.
Self-organization: The basic principle of neural functions.János Szentágothai - 1993 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (2).
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads