Explaining systematicity

Mind and Language 12 (2):115-36 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Despite the considerable attention that the systematicity argument has enjoyed, it is worthwhile examining the argument within the context of similar explanatory arguments from the history of science. This kind of analysis helps show that Connectionism, qua Connectionism, really does not have an explanation of systematicity. Second, and more surprisingly, one finds that the systematicity argument sets such a high explanatory standard that not even Classicism can explain the systematicity of thought.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
98 (#173,348)

6 months
6 (#512,819)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ken Aizawa
Rutgers University - Newark

Citations of this work

Perceptual symbol systems.Lawrence W. Barsalou - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):577-660.
Mapping the Visual Icon.Sam Clarke - 2022 - Philosophical Quarterly 72 (3):552-577.
Compositionality and constituent structure in the analogue mind.Sam Clarke - 2023 - Philosophical Perspectives 37 (1):90-118.
A non-representational approach to imagined action.I. van Rooij - 2002 - Cognitive Science 26 (3):345-375.

View all 14 citations / Add more citations