Oron Shagrir, John D. Norton, Holger Andreas, Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen, Aris Spanos, Eckhart Arnold, Elliott Sober, Peter Gildenhuys & Adela Helena Roszkowski
Philosophy of Science 77 (4):477-500 (2010)
| Abstract |
According to Marr, a computational-level theory consists of two elements, the what and the why. This article highlights the distinct role of the Why element in the computational analysis of vision. Three theses are advanced: that the Why element plays an explanatory role in computational-level theories, that its goal is to explain why the computed function is appropriate for a given visual task, and that the explanation consists in showing that the functional relations between the representing cells are similar to the “external” mathematical relations between the entities that these cells represent.
|
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| DOI | 10.1086/656005 |
| Options |
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Request removal from index
|
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture: A Critical Analysis.Jerry A. Fodor & Zenon W. Pylyshyn - 1988 - Cognition 28 (1-2):3-71.
Vision: Variations on Some Berkeleian Themes.Robert Schwartz & David Marr - 1985 - Philosophical Review 94 (3):411.
The Nature and Plausibility of Cognitivism.John Haugeland - 1978 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (2):215-26.
View all 34 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Solving the Black Box Problem: A Normative Framework for Explainable Artificial Intelligence.Carlos Zednik - 2019 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (2):265-288.
Minimal Models and Canonical Neural Computations: The Distinctness of Computational Explanation in Neuroscience.M. Chirimuuta - 2014 - Synthese 191 (2):127-153.
The Non-‐Redundant Contributions of Marr’s Three Levels of Analysis for Explaining Information Processing Mechanisms.William Bechtel & Oron Shagrir - 2015 - Topics in Cognitive Science 7 (2):312-322.
Brains as Analog-Model Computers.Oron Shagrir - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):271-279.
Who Got What Wrong? Fodor and Piattelli on Darwin: Guiding Principles and Explanatory Models in Natural Selection. [REVIEW]José Díez & Pablo Lorenzano - 2013 - Erkenntnis 78 (5):1143-1175.
View all 23 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Supervenience and Computational Explanation in Vision Theory.Peter Morton - 1993 - Philosophy of Science 60 (1):86-99.
Dispositional Versus Epistemic Causality.Paul Bohan Broderick, Johannes Lenhard & Arnold Silverberg - 2006 - Minds and Machines 16 (3).
Marr’s Computational Theory of Vision.Patricia Kitcher - 1988 - Philosophy of Science 55 (March):1-24.
Content, Kinds, and Individualism in Marr’s Theory of Vision.Lawrence A. Shapiro - 1993 - Philosophical Review 102 (4):489-513.
Perception and Proper Explanatory Width.Mark Rollins - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:437 - 445.
Marr's Theory of Vision and the Argument From Success.Peter A. Morton - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:154 - 161.
Optimization and Simplicity: Computational Vision and Biological Explanation.Daniel J. Gilman - 1996 - Synthese 107 (3):293 - 323.
Seeing and Summing: Implications of Computational Theories of Vision.Austen Clark - 1984 - Cognition and Brain Theory 7 (1):1-23.
Individualism and Marr’s Computational Theory of Vision.Keith Butler - 1996 - Mind and Language 11 (4):313-37.
Spot the Difference: Distinguishing Between Two Kinds of Processing.Jonathan St B. T. Evans - 2012 - Mind and Society 11 (1):121-131.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2013-12-19
Total views
23 ( #495,433 of 2,519,857 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,671 of 2,519,857 )
2013-12-19
Total views
23 ( #495,433 of 2,519,857 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,671 of 2,519,857 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads
