Images aren't primitive explanatory concepts
To be explanatory, images must play a role in causal explanations. Experience suggests they do not. Images in themselves (prior to interpretation) are epiphenomena that ride above a causal substrate of propositions, like foam rides atop a wave.
Zenon Pylyshyn (1973).

Note: Pylyshyn argues elsewhere that, in general, conscious processes lack explanatory power.
CONTEXT(Help)
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
▲
Can computers think? [1] »Can computers think? [1]
▲
No: computers can't understand images [5b] »No: computers can't understand images [5b]
▲
Images represented by filled cells in an array »Images represented by filled cells in an array
▲
Images are Quasi-pictorial representations »Images are Quasi-pictorial representations
▲
Image Psychology »Image Psychology
▲
Images are primitive, functional components of thought »Images are primitive, functional components of thought
■
Images aren't primitive explanatory concepts
●
Images are cognitively penetrable »Images are cognitively penetrable
●
Images important even if not primitive explanations »Images important even if not primitive explanations
◄
Zenon Pylyshyn »Zenon Pylyshyn
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About