Encapsulating architecture and encapsulating processes

Abstract

Thomas & Karmiloff-Smith (T&K-S) raise the excellent and, in retrospect, obvious point that in a dynamic learning environment where feedback is possible, we should expect networks to adapt to damage by altering details of their behavior. We should therefore not expect that developmental disorders should result in “normal” modules. The implications of this point go much further, since interprocess dependency in the brain does not rely only on learned neural connections. This argues strongly against behavioral and process-related definitions, as opposed to structural and architecture-related definitions, of mental modularity.