Problems of Connectionism

IF 0.6 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophies Pub Date : 2024-03-25 DOI:10.3390/philosophies9020041
Marta Vassallo, Davide Sattin, Eugenio Parati, Mario Picozzi
{"title":"Problems of Connectionism","authors":"Marta Vassallo, Davide Sattin, Eugenio Parati, Mario Picozzi","doi":"10.3390/philosophies9020041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between philosophy and science has always been complementary. Today, while science moves increasingly fast and philosophy shows some problems in catching up with it, it is not always possible to ignore such relationships, especially in some disciplines such as philosophy of mind, cognitive science, and neuroscience. However, the methodological procedures used to analyze these data are based on principles and assumptions that require a profound dialogue between philosophy and science. Following these ideas, this work aims to raise the problems that a classical connectionist theory can cause and problematize them in a cognitive framework, considering both philosophy and cognitive sciences but also the disciplines that are near to them, such as AI, computer sciences, and linguistics. For this reason, we embarked on an analysis of both the computational and theoretical problems that connectionism currently has. The second aim of this work is to advocate for collaboration between neuroscience and philosophy of mind because the promotion of deeper multidisciplinarity seems necessary in order to solve connectionism’s problems. In fact, we believe that the problems that we detected can be solved by a thorough investigation at both a theoretical and an empirical level, and they do not represent an impasse but rather a starting point from which connectionism should learn and be updated while keeping its original and profoundly convincing core.","PeriodicalId":31446,"journal":{"name":"Philosophies","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9020041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The relationship between philosophy and science has always been complementary. Today, while science moves increasingly fast and philosophy shows some problems in catching up with it, it is not always possible to ignore such relationships, especially in some disciplines such as philosophy of mind, cognitive science, and neuroscience. However, the methodological procedures used to analyze these data are based on principles and assumptions that require a profound dialogue between philosophy and science. Following these ideas, this work aims to raise the problems that a classical connectionist theory can cause and problematize them in a cognitive framework, considering both philosophy and cognitive sciences but also the disciplines that are near to them, such as AI, computer sciences, and linguistics. For this reason, we embarked on an analysis of both the computational and theoretical problems that connectionism currently has. The second aim of this work is to advocate for collaboration between neuroscience and philosophy of mind because the promotion of deeper multidisciplinarity seems necessary in order to solve connectionism’s problems. In fact, we believe that the problems that we detected can be solved by a thorough investigation at both a theoretical and an empirical level, and they do not represent an impasse but rather a starting point from which connectionism should learn and be updated while keeping its original and profoundly convincing core.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
联结主义的问题
哲学与科学之间的关系一直是相辅相成的。如今,虽然科学的发展越来越快,哲学在追赶科学的步伐上也出现了一些问题,但我们并非总能忽视这种关系,尤其是在一些学科中,如心灵哲学、认知科学和神经科学。然而,用于分析这些数据的方法论程序所依据的原则和假设要求哲学与科学之间进行深刻的对话。根据这些想法,这项工作旨在提出经典联结主义理论可能导致的问题,并在认知框架内将其问题化,既考虑哲学和认知科学,也考虑与它们相近的学科,如人工智能、计算机科学和语言学。为此,我们着手分析联结主义目前存在的计算和理论问题。这项工作的第二个目的是倡导神经科学与心灵哲学之间的合作,因为要解决联结主义的问题,似乎有必要促进更深层次的多学科合作。事实上,我们相信,我们所发现的问题可以通过理论和实证层面的深入研究来解决,这些问题并不代表僵局,而是一个起点,联结主义应从这个起点学习和更新,同时保持其原创性和深刻的内核。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophies
Philosophies Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
122
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Horror as Film Philosophy Poetic Judgement in Everyday Speech Didier Eribon vs. ‘The People’—A Critique of Chantal Mouffe’s Left Populism Decolonial Philosophies and Complex Communication as Praxis Belarus’s Sound Body
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1