Titlebook: Connectionism and the Philosophy of Mind; Terence Horgan,John Tienson Book 1991 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1991 Connectioni

巨大没有

0924-0780 ta­ processing systems of all kinds, no matter whether human, (other) animal, or machine. Its scope is intended to span the full range of interests from classical problems in the philosophy of mind and philosophical psychology through issues in cognitive psychology and sociobiology (concerning the m

山间窄路

Tumors and Tumorlike Conditions of Bone,ew of cognition and cognitive processing that we think deserves serious consideration whatever one may think of connectionism. Our main purpose in this paper is to draw attention to this neglected region in the logical space of views about cognition.

intrigue

Connectionism Versus Symbolism in High-Level Cognitionnist features will make important contributions to our understanding of high-level cognition. In what follows, a motivation is given for the need of such a synthesis, along with several, novel techniques used in connectionist systems designed to perform high-level, language-related processing tasks.

MENT

Is Perception Cognitively Mediated?eptual processes. A common assumption of . approaches is that . constructive operations are needed, then these must be cognitive operations which are similar to those which characterize thinking, reasoning, inference, and problem-solving.

胶状

0924-0780 t together a fine collection of stimulating studies on connectionism and its significance. As the Introduction explains, the most pressing questions concern whe978-94-010-5559-8978-94-011-3524-5Series ISSN 0924-0780

招致

agonist

What Connectionists Cannot Do: The Threat to Classical AI instructions of a (symbolic) program. The connectionist views mental processing as the dynamic and graded evolution of activity in a neural net, each unit’s activation depending on the connection strengths and activity of its neighbors, according to simple equations.

FER

Systematicity, Structured Representations and Cognitive Architecture: A Reply to Fodor and Pylyshynprise it is, the facts concerning the . of thought (the mainstay of Fodor’s and Pylyshyn’s argument) are revealed as ... The power of the Fodor and Pylyshyn critique depends, by contrast, on seeing those facts as a contingent empirical regularity to be explained by a certain model of in-the-head pro

誓言

Rebate