Mindcraft is a series of opinion posts on current issues in cognitive science by Brains Blog founder Gualtiero Piccinini. Do you agree? Disagree? Please contribute on the discussion board below! If you’d like to write a full-length response, please contact editors Dan Burnston and Nick Byrd. Recent Progress on Explaining Intentionality Gualtiero Piccinini Cross-posted …
The 1st Annual Web Conference of the International Society for the Philosophy of the Sciences of the Mind received many excellent submissions but decided to extend the deadline to allow even more submissions. Both individual submissions and symposia of up to five people are possible.
What is the mind, and how does it work? Centuries of philosophical and scientific investigation have shown that these questions are too big to be tackled once and for all with a single explanatory endeavor. The magnitude of this pursuit has necessitated a multidisciplinary approach: several disciplinary fields have tackled …
The contemporary (Fodor-style) Language of Thought (LOT) hypothesis (not to be confused with Sellars’s reasonable hypothesis that some neural processes are somewhat analogous to linguistic episodes) is that many cognitive capacities widespread within the animal kingdom, such as perception, navigation, or caching, are explained by processing language-like representations like those …
The International Society for the Philosophy of the Sciences of the Mind (ISPSM) presents: Practical Session: How can philosophers engage in interdisciplinary research? The session will take place on zoom on the 27th of January 2023 at 4 pm (GMT+1) All are welcome. More information here.
We are delighted to inform the philosophy community of a newly founded international society: International Society for the Philosophy of the Sciences of the Mind (ISPSM) The International Society for the Sciences of the Mind is a hub for connecting researchers around the globe in all areas of the philosophy …
When I went to graduate school in the 1990s, the mainstream assumptions were that (1) computation properly so called is digital and its limits are defined by classical computability theory, and (2) the debate in cognitive science was between “classical” (LOT) digital computation and “nonclassical” (connectionist in the narrow sense) …
