Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-g5lq8 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-11-03T17:32:56.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Machine Models for Cognitive Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

R. J. Nelson
R. J. Nelson*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Case Western Reserve University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Introduction. During the past two decades philosophers of psychology have considered a large variety of computational models for philosophy of mind and more recently for cognitive science. Among the suggested models are computer programs, Turing machines, pushdown automata, linear bounded automata, finite state automata and sequential machines. Many philosophers have found finite state automata models to be the most appealing, for various reasons, although there has been no shortage of defenders of programs and Turing machines. A paper by Arthur Burks (1973) convinced me long ago that “all natural human functions” are, or can be fruitfully modeled to be, finite state automata with output. Further work in the field has reinforced this conviction. There is room, however, for the use of any of the above models in philosophy of mind and in the ongoing development of cognitive science.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , September 1987 , pp. 391 - 408
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

I wish to thank Christopher Hill, Zenon Pylyshyn, and the referees for helpful critical comments on an earlier version of this paper.

References

Block, N. (1978), “Troubles with Functionalism”, in C. W. Savage (ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol. IX, Perception and Cognition: Issues in the Philosophy of Psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 261–325.Google Scholar
Block, N. and Fodor, J. A. (1972), “What Psychological States Are Not”, Philosophical Review 81: 159–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burks, A. W. (1972/1973), “Logic, Computers, and Men”, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 46: 39–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burks, A. W. and Copi, I. M. (1957), “The Logical Design of an Idealized General Purpose Computer”, Journal of the Franklin Institute 261: 297–314, 421–436.Google Scholar
Burks, A. W.; Goldstine, H. H.; and von Neumann, J. (1946), “Preliminary Discussion of the Logical Design of an Electronic Computing Instrument”, Part I, Vol. I, The Institute for Advanced Study.Google Scholar
Burks, A. W. and Wang, H. (1957), “The Logic of Automata”, Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 4: 193–218, 279–297.Google Scholar
Burks, A. W. and Wright, J. B. (1955), “Theory of Logical Nets”, Proceedings of the IRE 78: 1357–1365.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1972), Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.Google Scholar
Davis, M. (1958), Computability and Unsolvability. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Hill, C. S. (1983), Review of Webb, J. C., Mechanism, Mentalism, and Metamathematics, Philosophical Review 92: 276–279.Google Scholar
Hopcroft, J. E. and Ullman, J. D. (1979), Introduction to Automata Theory Languages and Computation. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Hwang, K. and Briggs, F. A. (1984), Computer Architecture and Parallel Processing. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Mendelson, E. (1966), Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, Inc.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (1968), Introduction to Automata. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (1969), “Behaviorism is False”, The Journal of Philosophy 66: 417–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (1978), “The Competence-Performance Distinction in Mental Philosophy”, Synthese 39: 337–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (1982), The Logic of Mind. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (1984), “Artifical Intelligence, Philosophy, and Existence Proofs”, in J. E. Hayes, D. Michie, and J-H Pao, Machine Intelligence 10, Chichester, England: Ellis Horwood Limited, pp. 541–553.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. J. (no date), “Church's Thesis in the Philosophy of Mind”, forthcoming in Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic.Google Scholar
Newell, A. (1982), “Physical Symbol Systems”, Cognitive Science 4: 135–183.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. (1984), Computation and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Turing, A. M. (1950), “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”, Mind 59: 457–478.Google Scholar