Top

Published in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

9. Two Ways into Complexity

Author : Andrea Zeppi

Published in: Language in Complexity

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The dynamic hypothesis (DH) about cognition has often been presented as an alternative to the widely popular computational hypothesis (CH) in cognitive science. While the theoretical distance that separates these two approaches may seem to be significant, there are reasons, we argue, to reconsider the relationship between the dynamical and computational ways of understanding the cognition.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Fiat Lux Versus Fiat Lumen: Quantum Effects in Linguistic Operations

next chapter Language and Brain Complexity

In this paper we will not address the following critical points: the semantics/syntax distinction (Putnam 1960; Searle 1980, 1992) or the computability tout-court of cognitive processes (Penrose 1999).

Since artificial cognitive system may well be computational, DH is a theoretical hypothesis only over the nature of cognitive systems that are found in nature and that have therefore naturally evolved.

See van Gelder (1998, p. 618) for a series of examples of dynamical systems in physics and mathematics.

The space where we find all the possible state in which the system may be in.

A branch of pure mathematics concerned with the behavior of complex systems (Alligood et al. 1997).

Since there is no discrete state subdivision different processes may well occur simultaneously but with different rates of change in the phase space.

However, while dynamicists are keen to aknowledge artificial neural network as genuine dynamical systems, they often consider connectionism itself as an unfinished attempt at overcoming computationalism (van Gelder and Port 1998, p. 32).

That, on the other hand, comes from the thick myelin sheath that distinguishes the human nervous system (Changizi 2001, 2007).

In particular the relation between the total cortical sheet area and the mean cortical synapse density shows that neurons have at they disposal only a limited space of gray area eligible for connectivity.

See, for example, the halting problem (Davis 2004; Turing 1936).

The length of the string representing the input.

That stands for Fixed Paramenter Cognition.

Alligood, K. T., Sauer, T. D., & Yorke, J. A. (1997). Chaos: An introduction to dynamical systems, Textbooks in Mathematical Sciences. Berlin: Springer.

Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Psychology Press.

Arora, S., & Barak, B. (2009). Computational complexity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefMATH

Byrne, D. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 2. London and New York: Routledge.

Changizi, M. A. (2001). Principles underlying Mammalian neocortical scaling. Biological Cybernetics, 84(3), 207–215.CrossRef

Changizi, M. A. (2007). Scaling the brain and its connections: Evolution of nervous systems 3, 167–180.

Cherniak, C. (1990). The bounded brain: Toward quantitative neuroanatomy. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2(1), 58–68.CrossRef

Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis 7–19.

Cook, S. A. (1971). The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. In Proceedings of the Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 151–158). ACM.

Cordeschi, R., & Frixione, M. (2007). Computationalism under attack In M. Marraffa, M. De Caro, & F. Ferretti (Eds.), Cartographies of the Mind (pp. 37–49).

Cummins, R. (2000). How does it work? ‘Versus’ what are the laws?: Two conceptions of psychological explanation. Explanation and Cognition, 117–144.

Davis, M. (2004). The undecidable: Basic papers on undecidable propositions, unsolvable problems and computable functions. Courier Dover Publications.

Downey, R. G., Fellows, M. R., & Stege, U. (1999). Parameterized complexity: A framework for systematically confronting computational intractability. In Contemporary Trends in Discrete Mathematics: From DIMACS and DIMATIA to the Future, AMS-DIMACS Proceedings Series (vol. 49, pp. 49–99).

Enderton, H. B. (1977). Elements of Recursion theory. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 90, 527–566.MathSciNetCrossRef

Fodor, J. (1975). The language of thought. New York: Thomas Crowell.

Frixione, M. (2001). Tractable competence. Minds and Machines, 11(3), 379–397.CrossRefMATH

Garey, M. R., & Johnson, D. S. (1979), Computers and intractability (vol. 174). New York: Freeman.

Goldreich, O. (Ed.). (2008). Computational complexity. A conceptual perspetive. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Horgan, T., & Tienson, J. (2006). Cognitive systems as dynamical systems. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17(3), 199–204.

Jerison, H. J. (1973). Evolution of the brain and intelligence. New York: Academic Press.

Jerison, H. J. (1991). Brain size and the evolution of mind. American Museum of Natural History.

Karp, R. M. (1972). Reducibility among combinatorial problems. Springer.

Marois, R., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Capacity limits of information processing in the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(6)(June), 296–305.

Massaro, D. W., & Cowan, N. (1993). Information processing models: Microscopes of the mind. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 383–425.CrossRef

McCulloch, W. S., & Pitts, W. (1943). A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 5(4), 115–133.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

McLaughlin, B. P. (2003). Computationalism, connectionism, and the philosophy of mind. In The Blackwell (Ed.), Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Penrose, R. (1999). Precis of the emperor’s new mind: Concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13(04), 643–655.CrossRef

Petitot, J. (1992). Physique Du Sens. Paris: Editions Du CNRS.

Petitot, J. (1999). Naturalizing phenomenology: Issues in contemporary phenomenology and cognitive science. Stanford University Press.

Piccinini, G. (2006). Computation without representation. Philosophical Studies, 137(2)(September 21), 205–241.

Piccinini, G. (2009). Computationalism in the philosophy of mind. Philosophy Compass, 4(3), 515–532.MathSciNetCrossRef

Piccinini, G. (2010a). The Resilience of Computationalism. Philosophy of Science, 77(5), 852–861.

Piccinini, G. (2010b). Computation in physical systems. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Piccinini, G., & Bahar, S. (2013). Neural computation and the computational theory of cognition. Cognitive Science, 37(3), 453–488.CrossRef

Putnam, H. (1960). Mind and machines. Mind, Language and Reality, 362–385.

Putnam, H. (1967). The nature of mental states. Mind, Language and Reality, 429–440.

Roth, G. (2012). Is the human brain unique?. In The Theory of Evolution and Its Impact (pp. 175–187). Springer.

Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Exploration in the microstructure of cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Saltzman, E. L. (1995). Dynamics and coordinate systems in skilled sensorimotor activity. Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition, 149–173.

Searle, J. R. (1992). The rediscovery of the mind. MIT press.

Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. In J. Haugeland (Ed.), Behavioral and Brain Sciences (vol. 3, no. 03, p. 417).

Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 1–20.CrossRef

Steiglitz, K., & Papadimitriou, C. H. (1982). Combinatorial optimization: Algorithms and complexity. New Jersey: Printice-Hall.MATH

Thelen, E. (1995). Time-scale dynamics and the development of an embodied cognition. Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition, 69–100.

Thom, R. (1988). Esquisse D’une Sémiophysique. Physique Aristotéliciene et Théorie Des Catastrophes. Interéditions, Paris.

Townsend, J. T., & Busemeyer, J. (1995). Dynamic representation of decision-making. Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition, 101–120.

Trautteur, G. (1999). Analog computation and the continuum-discrete conundrum. In R. Lupacchini, & E. G. Tamburrini (Eds.), Grounding Effective Processes in Empirical Laws. Reflections on the Notion of Algorithm, Bulzoni, Roma.

Turing, A. M. (1936). On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungs problem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 42(2), 230–265.

van Gelder, T. (1995). What might cognition be if not computation? The Journal of Phylosophy, 92(7), 345–381.CrossRef

van Gelder, T. (1998). The dynamical hypothesis in cognitive science. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(5), 615–628. (discussion 629–665).

van Gelder, T., & Port, R. (1998). Mind as motion. Exploration in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press Cambridge.

van Rooij, I. (2008). The tractable cognition thesis. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 32(6), 939–984.CrossRef

van Rooij, I., & Wareham, T. (2007). Parameterized complexity in cognitive modeling: Foundations, applications and opportunities. The Computer Journal, 51(3)(November 23), 385–404.

Title: Two Ways into Complexity
Author: Andrea Zeppi
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Language in Complexity
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-29481-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-29483-4

Copyright Year: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29483-4_9

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner