Must cognition be representational?

In various contexts and for various reasons, writers often define cognitive processes and architectures as those involving representational states and structures. Similarly, cognitive theories are also often delineated as those that invoke representations. In this paper, I present several reasons fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 194; no. 11; pp. 4197 - 4215
Autor principal: Ramsey, William
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Nov2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=126215325&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 126215325
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Nov2017
      vid: 194
      iid: 11
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        126215325
        10.1007/s11229-014-0644-6
      ppf: 4197
      ppct: 18
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 384KB
      tig:
        atl: Must cognition be representational?
      aug:
        au: Ramsey, William
        affil: Department of Philosophy , University of Nevada , Las Vegas USA
      su:
        Representation (Philosophy)
        Cognition
        Ethnopsychology
        Culture
        Deflationary theory of truth
      sug:
        subj:
          Representation (Philosophy)
          Cognition
          Ethnopsychology
          Culture
          Deflationary theory of truth
      keyword:
        Demarcation criteria
        Folk psychology
        Marr's levels
        Representation demarcation thesis
        Representationalism
      ab: In various contexts and for various reasons, writers often define cognitive processes and architectures as those involving representational states and structures. Similarly, cognitive theories are also often delineated as those that invoke representations. In this paper, I present several reasons for rejecting this way of demarcating the cognitive. Some of the reasons against defining cognition in representational terms are that doing so needlessly restricts our theorizing, it undermines the empirical status of the representational theory of mind, and it encourages wildly deflationary and explanatorily vacuous conceptions of representation. After criticizing this outlook, I sketch alternative ways we might try to capture what is distinctive about cognition and cognitive theorizing.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2017. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2017
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N