Symbols and Nets: Cooperation vs Competition

Abstract

This is a paperback reissue of a 1988 special issue of Cognition - dated but still of interest. The book consists of three chapters, each making one major negative point about connectionism. Fodor & Pylyshyn (F&P) argue that connectionist networks (henceforth 'nets') are not good models for cognition because they lack 'systematicity', Pinker & Price (P&P) argue that nets are not good substitutes for rule-based models of linguistic ability, and Lachter & Bever (L&B) argue that nets can only model the associative relations between cognitive structures, not the structures themselves.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Connecting object to symbol in modeling cognition.Stevan Harnad - 1992 - In A. Clark & Ronald Lutz (eds.), Connectionism in Context. Springer Verlag. pp. 75--90.
A new correctness criterion for cyclic proof nets.V. Michele Abrusci & Elena Maringelli - 1998 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7 (4):449-459.
Cooperation, competition, and democracy.Shaomeng Li - 2011 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (2):273-283.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-22

Downloads
11 (#1,075,532)

6 months
2 (#1,157,335)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stevan Harnad
McGill University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references