Are Computational Transitions Sensitive to Semantics?

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):703-721 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The formal conception of computation (FCC) holds that computational processes are not sensitive to semantic properties. FCC is popular, but it faces well-known difficulties. Accordingly, authors such as Block and Peacocke pursue a ?semantically-laden? alternative, according to which computation can be sensitive to semantics. I argue that computation is insensitive to semantics within a wide range of computational systems, including any system with ?derived? rather than ?original? intentionality. FCC yields the correct verdict for these systems. I conclude that there is only one promising strategy for semantically-laden theorists: identify special computational systems that help generate their own semantic properties, and then show that computation within those systems is semantically-laden. Unfortunately, the few existing discussions that pursue this strategy are problematic

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Against Structuralist Theories of Computational Implementation.Michael Rescorla - 2013 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (4):681-707.
Computation and intentional psychology.Murat Aydede - 2000 - Dialogue 39 (2):365-379.
The semantic challenge to computational neuroscience.Rick Grush - 2001 - In Peter McLaughlin, Peter Machamer & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. Pittsburgh University Press. pp. 155--172.
Computation, external factors, and cognitive explanations.Amir Horowitz - 2007 - Philosophical Psychology 20 (1):65-80.
Computation without representation.Gualtiero Piccinini - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 137 (2):205-241.
A computational foundation for the study of cognition.David Chalmers - 2011 - Journal of Cognitive Science 12 (4):323-357.
Foundations of intensional semantics.Chris Fox - 2005 - Malden MA: Blackwell. Edited by Shalom Lappin.
Computation, connectionism and modelling the mind.Mary Litch - 1997 - Philosophical Psychology 10 (3):357-364.
Emdedded systems vs. individualism.Michael Losonsky - 1995 - Minds and Machines 5 (3):357-71.
Beyond Turing equivalence.Aaron Sloman - 1996 - In Peter Millican Andy Clark (ed.), Machines and Thought The Legacy of Alan Turing. Oxford University Press. pp. 1--179.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-10-06

Downloads
122 (#142,922)

6 months
9 (#250,037)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Rescorla
University of California, Los Angeles

Citations of this work

The language of thought hypothesis.Murat Aydede - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Causal Relevance of Content to Computation.Michael Rescorla - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (1):173-208.
Do Computers "Have Syntax, But No Semantics"?Jaroslav Peregrin - 2021 - Minds and Machines 31 (2):305-321.
Syntax, Semantics, and Computer Programs.William J. Rapaport - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):309-321.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations