The Three-Concept Monte

Fodor, Pylyshyn and McLaughlin distract connectionists with talk of systematicity and implementation; concealing the crucial issue of explanation. It turns out that the only explanations classicists are willing to accept are classical explanations.

The three concepts in the monte being: systematicity, implementaiton and explanation.

Robert Matthews, 1994.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a]
The Connectionist Dilemma
The Three-Concept Monte
Burden of proof is on connectionism
Connectionism is associationism
Cognition isn’t always systematic
Connectionist machines possess compositional semantics
Connectionist representations avoid the dilemma
Systematicity explained by natural selection
Systematicity is a conceptual not empirical law
Systematicity not enough to argue for classicism
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip