Jerry Fodor’s Modularity of Mind is a beginning [It] is the first major monograph in this century to explore some variations on faculty psychology [and] is the best. Where Fodor (, ) draws the line of modularity at the Perceptual plasticity and theoretical neutrality: A reply to Jerry Fodor. John C. Marshall, The Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, – Alvin Liberman, Yale University, President, Haskins Laboratories ” Jerry Fodor’s “Modularity of Mind “is a.
|Published (Last):||27 October 2005|
|PDF File Size:||18.70 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.4 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If this section characterized the entirety of the text, the reader would be better advised to research modern probabilistic graphical models, and attempts within the AI community to approximate universal induction. So the argument falters at the first step. Oct 12, Kevin rated it really liked it Shelves: His rich empirical insights are as relevant as ever, and none of the major ideas in the book have been settled one way or another by more recent data though the debates continue to rage as fiercely as ever.
Modularity of mind – Wikipedia
I will briefly sketch each subsection. Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
The second can be characterized as a vertical view because it claims that the mental faculties are differentiated on the basis of domain specificity, are genetically determined, are associated with distinct neurological structures, and are computationally autonomous.
To streamline the exposition, we will cluster most of the features thematically and examine them on a cluster-by-cluster basis, along the lines of Prinz This corresponds to encapsulation as Fodor uses the term. The author’s penchant for polemics was not apparent in this essay.
For an undergraduate philosopher of mind, it’s positively essential.
Evolution and Cognition6: Clay Miller rated it it was amazing Jul 07, Amazon Renewed Refurbished products with a warranty. Input processing involves non-demonstrative inferences from this raw data to hypotheses about the layout of objects in the world.
Modularity of Mind
The main sticking points are these: There was a faculty of memory, a faculty of judgment, and so on. Other purported top-down effects on perception, such as the effect of golfing performance on size and distance estimates of golf holes Witt et al. He closes with self-styled gloomy remarks about how our best thinkers have consistently evaluated local phenomena more effectively than global phenomena c.
Fodor strongly opposes reductive accounts of the mind. Marshall, The Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, “The issue Fodor writes modulafity is central to the psychology of perception, cognition, and action. While discussing Neo-Cartesianism, Fodoe draws the distinction between innate faculties: Collins – – Minds and Machines 15 1: On this view, modular systems come on-line chiefly as the result of a brute-causal process like triggering, rather than an intentional-causal process like learning.
Simon Baron-Cohen Justin L. Aug 28, Paul rated it liked it. A system is inaccessible in this sense if the intermediate-level representations that it computes prior to producing its output are inaccessible to consciousness, and hence unavailable for explicit report.
A supramodal hierarchical processor? The rapidity of responses such as jealousy due to infidelity indicates a domain-specific dedicated module rather than a general, deliberate, rational calculation of fodod. This perspective suggests that modules are units of mental processing that evolved in response to selection pressures.
Here, subjects watching a video of one phoneme being spoken e. Just as there are general theoretical arguments for massive modularity, there are general theoretical arguments against it. Fodor adheres to a species of functionalism, maintaining that thinking and other mental processes consist primarily of computations operating on the syntax of the representations that make up the language of thought.
Reactions may occur instinctively consistent with innate knowledge even if a person has not learned such knowledge.
In a human they represent the senses. It’s informationally encapsulated because central processing can’t alter the representations encoded – it’s automatic this is more clearly seen in the case of optical illusions – press gently against your eye: Wilson – – In Robert J. Interestingly, beliefs tend to fixate at a particular level e.
Interest in modularity is not confined to cognitive science and the philosophy of mind; it extends well into a number of allied fields. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review Empirical objections to massive modularity take a variety of forms. Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. Central non-modular systems must locate their conclusions at a specific level within this hierarchy.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences. For the purposes of this argument, we assume that a mental process is computationally tractable if it can be specified at the algorithmic level in such a way that modulariry execution of the process is feasible given time, energy, and other resource constraints on human cognition Samuels, As such, the evidence cited can be accommodated by friends of modest modularity, provided that allowance is made for the potential impact of environmental, including cultural, variables on development—something that most accounts of innateness make room for.
Genes, brain, and cognition: