The nature of symbols in the language of thought

Mind and Language 24 (5):523-553 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The core of the language of thought program is the claim that thinking is the manipulation of symbols according to rules. Yet LOT has said little about symbol natures, and existing accounts are highly controversial. This is a major flaw at the heart of the LOT program: LOT requires an account of symbol natures to naturalize intentionality, to determine whether the brain even engages in symbol manipulations, and to understand how symbols relate to lower-level neurocomputational states. This paper provides the much-needed theory of symbols, and in doing so, alters the LOT program in significant respects.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 86,377

External links

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

Through your library


Added to PP

346 (#45,642)

6 months
8 (#127,780)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Susan Schneider
Florida Atlantic University

Citations of this work

The language of thought hypothesis.Murat Aydede - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Picturing, signifying, and attending.Bryce Huebner - 2018 - Belgrade Philosophical Annual 1 (31):7-40.
Holism, conceptual role, and conceptual similarity.Joey Pollock - 2020 - Philosophical Psychology 33 (3):396-420.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations