Not All Computational Methods Are Effective Methods

Philosophies 7 (5):113 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An effective method is a computational method that might, in principle, be executed by a human. In this paper, I argue that there are methods for computing that are not effective methods. The examples I consider are taken primarily from quantum computing, but these are only meant to be illustrative of a much wider class. Quantum inference and quantum parallelism involve steps that might be implemented in multiple physical systems, but cannot be implemented, or at least not at will, by an idealised human. Recognising that not all computational methods are effective methods is important for at least two reasons. First, it is needed to correctly state the results of Turing and other founders of computation theory. Turing is sometimes said to have offered a replacement for the informal notion of an effective method with the formal notion of a Turing machine. I argue that such a view only holds under limited circumstances. Second, not distinguishing between computational methods and effective methods can lead to mistakes when quantifying over the class of all possible computational methods. Such quantification is common in philosophy of mind in the context of thought experiments that explore the limits of computational functionalism. I argue that these ‘homuncular’ thought experiments should not be treated as valid.

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

Similar books and articles

Computation and hypercomputation.Mike Stannett - 2003 - Minds and Machines 13 (1):115-153.
Effective Computation by Humans and Machines.Shagrir Oron - 2002 - Minds and Machines 12 (2):221-240.
Hyperloops do not threaten the notion of an effective procedure.Tim Button - 2009 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5635:68-78.
The diagonal method and hypercomputation.Toby Ord & Tien D. Kieu - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (1):147-156.
What is computation?B. Jack Copeland - 1996 - Synthese 108 (3):335-59.
What an Algorithm Is.Robin K. Hill - 2016 - Philosophy and Technology 29 (1):35-59.
Buttresses of the Turing Barrier.Paolo Cotogno - 2015 - Acta Analytica 30 (3):275-282.
Hypercomputation and the Physical Church‐Turing Thesis.Paolo Cotogno - 2003 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (2):181-223.
On effective procedures.Carol E. Cleland - 2002 - Minds and Machines 12 (2):159-179.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-11-14

Downloads
30 (#521,181)

6 months
11 (#225,837)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Sprevak
University of Edinburgh

Citations of this work

Quantum computing.Amit Hagar & Michael Cuffaro - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis.Paul Oppenheim & Hilary Putnam - 1958 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 2:3-36.
Psychologism and behaviorism.Ned Block - 1981 - Philosophical Review 90 (1):5-43.
Form, function and feel.William Lycan - 1981 - Journal of Philosophy 78 (January):24-50.
The appeal to tacit knowledge in psychological explanation.Jerry A. Fodor - 1968 - Journal of Philosophy 65 (October):627-40.

View all 28 references / Add more references