Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T14:29:29.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The nature and plausibility of Cognitivism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

John Haugeland
John Haugeland
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cognitivism in psychology and philosophy is roughly the position that intelligent behavior can (only) be explained by appeal to internal “cognitive processes,” that is, rational thought in a very broad sense. Sections 1 to 5 attempt to explicate in detail the nature of the scientific enterprise that this intuition has inspired. That enterprise is distinctive in at least three ways: It relies on a style of explanation which is different from that of mathematical physics, in such a way that it is not basically concerned with quantitative equational laws; the states and processes with which it deals are “interpreted,” in the sense that they are regarded as meaningful or representational; and it is not committed to reductionism, but is open to reduction in a form different from that encountered in other sciences. Spelling these points out makes it clear that the Cognitivist study of the mind can be rigorous and empirical, despite its unprecedented theoretical form. The philosophical explication has another advantage as well: It provides a much needed framework for articulating questions about whether the Cognitivist approach is right or wrong. The last three sections take that advantage of the account, and address several such questions, pro and con.

Keywords

explanationcognitioninformation processingreductionmethodologycomputer modelsphilosophy of science
Type
Target Article
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , June 1978 , pp. 215 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baron, R. J.A Model for Cortical Memory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1970, 7, 37–59.Google Scholar
Block, N., and Fodor, J.What Psychological States are Not. Philosophical Review, 1972, 81, 159–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, F. S.The Transmission of Spatial Information through the Visual System. (In: Schmitt, and Worden, , eds., 1974).Google Scholar
Cathey, W. T.Optical Information Processing and Holography. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavanagh, J. P. Holographic Processes Realizable in the Neural Realm. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, 1972.Google Scholar
Cummins, R.Functional Analysis. Journal of Philosophy, 1975, 72, 741–65.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. Mental Events. In: Foster, and Swanson, , eds. Experience and Theory. Univ. Mass. Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Davidson, D.Radical Interpretation. Dialectica, 1973, 27, 313–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Groot, A.Thought and Choice in Chess. The Hague: Mouton, 1965.Google Scholar
Dennett, D.Intentional Systems. Journal of Philosophy, 1971, 68, 87–106.Google Scholar
Dennett, D.Why the Law of Effect Will Not Go Away. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 1975, 5, 169–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, D. Why You Can't Make a Computer that Feels Pain. Synthese (forthcoming). On the Absence of Phenomenology, (unpublished).Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. L.What Computers Can't Do. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.Google Scholar
Erickson, R. P.Parallel “Population” Neural Coding in Feature Extraction. (In: Schmitt, and Worden, , eds., 1974).Google Scholar
Firth, I. M.Holography and Computer Generated Holograms. London: Mills & Boon, 1972.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. Explanation in Psychology. In: Black, M., ed., Philosophy in America. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Fodor, J.Special Sciences (or: The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis). Synthese, 1974, 28, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, P., and Adesman, P.Recall Memory for Visually Presented Chess Positions. Memory and Cognition, 1976, 4, 541–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gabor, D.Associative Holographic Memories. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 1969, 13, 156–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gödel, K.Üiber formal unentscheidbare Satze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte fur Mathematik und Physik, 1931, 38, 173–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N.Languages of Art. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1968.Google Scholar
Grandy, R.Reference, Meaning and Belief. Journal of Philosophy, 1973, 70, 439–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeno, J. Process of Understanding in Problem Solving. In: Castellan, , Piscni, , and Potts, , eds., Cognitive Theory II. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977.Google Scholar
Harman, G.Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Hearst, E. Psychology across the Chessboard. Psychology Today, June 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G., and Oppenheim, P.Studies in the Logic of Explanation. Philosophy of Science, 1948, 15, 135–75.Google Scholar
Herriott, D. R. Applications of Laser Light. Scientific American, September 1968.Google Scholar
Hudson, L.The Cult of the Fact. London: Cape, 1972.Google Scholar
Kabrisky, M.A Proposed Model for Visual Information Processing in the Human Brain. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Kosslyn, S. M., and Pomerantz, J. R.Imagery, Propositions, and the Form of Internal Representations. Cognitive Psychology, 1977, 9, 52–76.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T.The Structure ofScientiJic Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962 (revised ed. 1970).Google Scholar
Leith, E. N., and Upatnieks, J. Photography by Laser. Scientific American, June, 1965.Google Scholar
Lewis, D.Radical Interpretation. Synthese, 1974, 23, 331–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, J. R. Minds, Machines and Godel. In: Anderson, A., ed., Minds and Machines. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.Google Scholar
Minsky, M., and Papert, S. Artificial Intelligence Progress Report. Artificial Intelligence Memo No. 252, MIT, 1972.Google Scholar
Nagel, E., and Newman, J. R.Göde's Proof. New York University Press, 1958.Google Scholar
Paivio, A.Imagery and Synchronic Thinking. Canadian Psychological Review, 1975, 16, 147–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollen, D. A., and Taylor, J. H.The Striate Cortex and the Spatial Analysis of Visual Space. (In: Schmitt, and Worden, , eds., 1974).Google Scholar
Pribram, K. H.Languages of the Brain. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971.Google Scholar
Pribram, K. H.How is it that Sensing So Much We Can Do So Little? (In: Schmitt, and Worden, , eds., 1974).Google Scholar
Pribram, K. H., Nuwer, M., and Baron, R. J. The Holographic Hypothesis of Memory Structure in Brain Function and Perception. In: Krantz, D. H., et al. , eds., Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology, II. San Francisco: Freeman, 1974.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. Minds and Machines. In: Anderson, A., ed., Minds and Machines. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.Google Scholar
Putnam, H.Mind, Language and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z.What the Mind's Eye Tells the Mind's Brain: A Critique of Mental Imagery. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 1–24.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. Imagery and Artificial Intelligence. To appear in Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Science, IX. (in press).Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O.Word and Object. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Schmitt, F. O., and Worden, F. G., eds. The Neurosciences: Third Study Program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Sellars, W.Science, Perception and Reality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963.Google Scholar
Shepard, R. N., and Metzler, J.Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects. Science, 1971, 171, 701–703.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, S.Functionalism and Qualia. Philosophical Studies, 1975, 27, 291–315.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A.The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1969.Google Scholar
van Heerden, P. J.A New Method of Storing and Retrieving Information. Applied Optics, 1963, 2, 387–92.Google Scholar
Wilson, N. L.Substances without Substrata. Review of Metaphysics, 1959, 12, 521–39.Google Scholar
Winograd, T.Understanding Natural Languages. Cognitive Psychology, 1972, 3, 1–191.Google Scholar
Yevick, M. L.Holographic or Fourier Logic. Pattern Recognition, 1975, 7, 197–213.Google Scholar