Metaphor, Modularity, and the Evolution of Conceptual Integration.

We integrate information from distinct domains, especially in metaphor. What sort of cognitive architecture underlies this kind of integration? Fodor (1983) argued that it involves nonmodular mechanisms. He also contended that the nonmodular mechanisms evolved from modular ones through a process of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Metaphor & Symbol Vol. 15; no. 3; pp. 137 - 159
Main Author: Chiappe, Dan L.
Format: Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Ltd 2000
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=3402885&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 3402885
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10926488
        7MO
      jtl: Metaphor & Symbol
      issn: 10926488
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: 2000
      vid: 15
      iid: 3
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
    artinfo:
      ui:
        3402885
        10.1207/S15327868MS1503_2
      ppf: 137
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
              db: hlh
              ui: 3402885
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              db: hlh
              ui: 3402885
      tig:
        atl: Metaphor, Modularity, and the Evolution of Conceptual Integration.
      aug:
        au: Chiappe, Dan L.
        affil: Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University
      su:
        Metaphor
        Integration (Theory of knowledge)
        Modularity (Psychology)
      sug:
        subj:
          Metaphor
          Integration (Theory of knowledge)
          Modularity (Psychology)
      ab: We integrate information from distinct domains, especially in metaphor. What sort of cognitive architecture underlies this kind of integration? Fodor (1983) argued that it involves nonmodular mechanisms. He also contended that the nonmodular mechanisms evolved from modular ones through a process of demodularization, a position elaborated by Mithen (1996). In this article, I defend Fodor and Mithen from criticisms offered by Sperber (1994). Sperber suggested that nonmodular mechanisms are unlikely to have evolved because an increasingly large database would incapacitate the cognitive system due to combinatorial explosion and the frame problem. Moreover, he argued that nonmodular mechanisms are not required to explain our ability to integrate information. I argue that proponents of demodularization can respond to Sperber's criticisms by assuming that either an expanding database co-evolved with increasingly sophisticated search mechanisms or the cognitive system evolved along connectionist lines. Moreover, I argue that Sperber's modular account of conceptual integration fails to satisfy the criteria for modularity-namely, information encapsulation.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N