Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08 6.3. 16-18 Intro 2: Introducing the Culture/Discipline Strand:

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08

6.3. 16-18Intro 2:

Introducing theCulture/Discipline Strand:


→ take up questions from yesterday‘s SE session

→ cognitive science approach

→ functionalism, interdisciplinary model

→ problems, diversification

→ your experience with cogsci, interdisciplinarity

→ models of interdisciplinarity +/-

→ interdisciplinarity: limits & alternatives

→ locating cogsci history

→ current challenges & opportunites

bigger picture

received view


→ take up questions from yesterday‘s SE session:









bigger picture

received view


The Specific Cognitive Science Take on the Mind

t

he

cog

nit

ive

revo

luti

on

cybernetics

behaviorism

Linguis tics

Philosophy

Psychology

Computer Science

Neu roscience

SocioculturalStudies

Interdisciplinarity

Computer metaphor:

Tinking as rule governedsymbol manipulation

Functionalism

1950ies1940ies 1960ies 1970ies1930ies 20ies

key notion:„representation“


On the cognitivist view, symbols are objects that have three aspects: physical, syntactic, semantic.

It is on the strenght of these symbols that cognitivism claims to be able to span the gap that separates the physical world from the world of meaning. Computiation may therfore be described as the central pier of the cognitivst bridge. Cognitivism also assumes that purely formal computations carried out at that syntactic level are materially empodied in the causal processes that occur within the computer insofar as it ist a physical object, and are interpreted at the semantic level on the basis of elementary meanings assigned to the symbols.

Dupuy, J.-P. (1999). The Mechanization of the Mind: On the Origins of Cognitive Science. Princeton, Princeton University Press. p: 5

The „Trick“ of Functionalism to solve the„Mind-Body or Physical World/Meaning Problem


The Specific Cognitive Science Take on the Mind: Ambitious Beginnings:

1950ies1940ies 1960ies 1970ies1930ies

t

he

cog

nit

ive

revo

luti

on

cybernetics

behaviorism

L ingu is tics

P h ilosophy

P sychology

C om puter S c ience

N euroscience

S ociocu lturalS tud ies

20ies

Optimism:finally solving problems philosophers & haven‘t been able to deal with…

McCarthy: Modeling vision as a summer project for one of his students

Focus on:language,reasoning„higher“ cogn. functions

Simon: by 1985 “machines will be capable of doing any work that a man can do.”

´67 Minsky: “Within 20 years computers won’t even keep us as pets.”


The Specific Cognitive Science Take on the Mind:The Current State of Cognitive Science: Diversification

Classical Cognitive Science

connectionism

cognitive linguistics

…

1980ies 1990ies1950ies1940ies 1960ies 1970ies1920ies 1930ies 2000

t

he

cog

nit

ive

revo

luti

on

cognitiveneuroscience

cybernetics

embodiment

situatedness

behaviorism

a-life

dynamicalsystems

evolutionarypsychology











bigger picture

received view


What do you think/how do you feel about the cognitive science take on the mind?Are the goals once set reached?What are the achievements of Cogsci?How much progress is there?

What are your experiences with CogSci as a Discipline?Is it a Discipline?What are your experiences with its interdisciplinarity?What kind of interdisciplinarity is it, in your opinion? What about your identity?

The Specific Cognitive Science Take on the Mind and the Current State of Cognitive Science:Your Opinion


The Specific Cognitive Science Take on the Mind:Change & Diversification through (among other things):

Classical Cognitive Science

connectionism

1980ies 1990ies1950ies1940ies 1960ies 1970ies1920ies 1930ies 2000

t

he

cog

nit

ive

revo

luti

on

cognitiveneuroscience

cybernetics

embodiment

situatedness

behaviorism

- technological progress…

- reacting to problemsdynamicalsystems

But…. at the same time redefining the topic of investigation…e.g. „insect walking“, interest shifting to problems of control… +/-


- fragmentation?

- stagnation?

A Pessimist‘s View from within Cognitive Science: Crisis?

„symbol grounding/ frame problemstill firmly in place“

„stagnation in roboticist bottom up approaches:where to from insect walking?“ → scaling problem

„AI is dead“

„no artificial life yet.“

is cognitive neuroscience taking over?

„language, reasoning, etc. far from explained….“


Representation has been the central issue in artificial intelligence work over the last 15 years only because it has provided an interface between otherwise isolated modules and conference papers (Brooks 1991).

A Critical Look back…. Interdisciplinarity?

L ingu is tics

P h ilosophy

P sychology

C om puter S c ience

N euroscience

S ociocu lturalS tud ies


taking a closer look at interdisciplinariy…











bigger picture

received view


What models of interdisciplinarity are there?

In how far and how can different disciplinces work together?

What ways of interaction and relating to each other are there?

What are the respective roles of the different disciplines?

Models of Interdisciplinarity: a First Approximation


Different Models of Interdisciplinarity: a few examples…

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08Thagard, P. (2005). Mind. Introduction to Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA, Bradford MIT Press.

Models of Interdisciplinarity: the Jigsaw Puzzle

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08Thagard, P. (2005). Mind. Introduction to Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA, Bradford MIT Press.

Models of Interdisciplinarity: the Jigsaw Puzzle

How are the disciplines related, and what are their respective roles?


Models of Interdisciplinarity: the Layered Cake

Churchland, P. S. and T. J. Sejnowski (1992). The Computational Brain. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.


Levels of Neuroscience


Levels of Neuroscience

→ see also early 20th century: unity of science movement


biological

cognitive

socio-cultural

mechanisch elektrochemisch

Repräsentation

Normen ...

Models of Interdisciplinarity: the Layered Cake extended



biological

cognitive

socio-cultural

mechanisch elektrochemisch ...

Repräsentation

Normen ...



biological

cognitive

socio-cultural

mechanisch elektrochemisch

Repräsentation

Normen ...


relations & roles of disciplines - some keywords: reductionism, eliminativism, non-reductionism, „emergence“

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant

"Blind monks examining an elephant", an 1888 ukiyo-e print by Hanabusa Itchō.

Models of Interdisciplinarity: 6 Blind Men and Elephant


It was six men of HindustanTo learning much inclined,Who went to see the Elephant(Though all of them were blind)That each by observationMight satisfy the mind.

The first approached the ElephantAnd happening to fallAgainst his broad and sturdy sideAt once began to bawl:"Bless me, it seems the ElephantIs very like a wall".

The second, feeling of his tusk,Cried, "Ho! What have we hereSo very round and smooth and sharp?To me 'tis mighty clearThis wonder of an ElephantIs very like a spear".


The third approached the animal,And happening to takeThe squirming trunk within his hands,Then boldly up and spake:"I see," quoth he, "the ElephantIs very like a snake."

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,And felt about the knee."What most this wondrous beast is likeIs mighty plain," quoth he;"'Tis clear enough the ElephantIs very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,Said: "E'en the blindest manCan tell what this resembles most;Deny the fact who can,This marvel of an ElephantIs very like a fan!"


The Sixth no sooner had begunAbout the beast to grope,Than, seizing on the swinging tailThat fell within his scope,"I see," quoth he, "the ElephantIs very like a rope!"

And so these men of HindustanDisputed loud and long,Each in his own opinionExceeding stiff and strong,Though each was partly in the rightAnd all were in the wrong.

So oft in theologic wars,The disputants, I ween,Rail on in utter ignoranceOf what each other mean,And prate about an ElephantNot one of them has seen!

http://www.noogenesis.com/pineapple/blind_men_elephant.htmlJohn Godfrey Saxe ( 1816-1887)





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant





→ Fleck, Kuhn, …?





Different ways of interpretation!





Consider what specific Philosophers of Science would say about the story: Popper

FleckKuhnFeyerabend…



http://www.noogenesis.com/pineapple/blind_men_elephant.html


But… at least they are all blind …not one blind, one deaf, etc….



…and at least it is still one elephant, or ist it?

„brain“„mind“

http://www.noogenesis.com/pineapple/blind_men_elephant.html


„But…what‘s the cake?“

Models of Interdisciplinarity: the Cake-Slicing Model











bigger picture

received view


interdisciplinarity: vertical

...

AI Ling PhiloNeuro Cogsci

• (+) institutional autonomy, identity

• (-) tale of the ecumenical church → just one more discipline?


interdisciplinarity: horizontal

...

AI Ling PhiloNeuro

Cogsci

• interdisciplinary group / sequential disciplinarian / traveller?

• identity? potentially risky. who pays the bills? ;-)











bigger picture

received view


bigger picture: goals

• illustrate challenges & opportunites of modern cogsci

• deepening the concepts/outlook of the previous semester

→ demonstration of the utility of adopting a larger view

• providing a framework for discussing strategies

→ this course→ the study/program curriculum→ individual strategies


3 parts

• scope and limits of the interdisciplinary model of cogsci

• discuss opportunity and challenges of pluralism/fragmentation

→ emphasis on strategy

• revisit the history of cognitive science

→ locating paradigms


inspired by:

Dupuy, J.-P. (1999). The Mechanization of the Mind: On the Origins of Cognitive Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.


interdisciplinary model: PR


interdisciplinary model: more realistic


Howards Gardner’s 5 Principles (1985)

• level of analysis (mental representations) wholly separate from the biological/neurological and from the sociological level

• the electronic computer as the most viable model to how the human mind functions

• de-emphasize certain factors: affects/emotions, historical and cultural factors, background context

• interdisciplinarity• Western philosophy

→ field has changed enormously in the last two decades…


interdisciplinary model: more realistic

autonomous frombiology/neuroscience& socio-cultural studies

electronic computeras model for the mind

emotions,background context


connotations of “cognitive science“

paradigm

(traditional) community

field of cognitive sciences


taking stock

(+) there is much more to be gained even from within the traditional 6 disciplines that is (intentionally) not part of the traditional cogsci approach

(-) getting oriented in even one or two disciplines this is quite hard and takes a veeery long time…

→ challenge of integration remains…

→ partly the strategy of the study program: disciplinary column


history of cognitive science revisited


phase 0: fertile ground

cybernetics

cognitive behaviorism

neurophysiology

… …


phase 1a: early institutionalization

computer science (symbol systems)

neuroscience (neurology)linguistics (Chomskean)

psychology(cognitive)

cutting off many of its rich roots was the price that early cognitive science had to pay for passing from an exploratory stage to a full-fledged research program from a cloud to a crystal (Francisco Varela)


phase 1b: institutionalization


phase 2: broadening scope

→ connectionism: neural networks (cybernetics) re-enter

→ dynamical systems (cybernetics) re-enter

→ emotion & motivation become hot topics again …

→ autonomous robots (cybernetics) re-enter


phase 3: bursting

(artist‘s impression ;-)


phase 3: examples

Human Computer Interaction (HCI)

Psychology

Linguistics

Computer Science


phase 3: examples

Computer Supported Cooperative Work

(CSCW)

Computer Science

Anthropology

Psychology


phase 3: examples

Cognitive Ethology

Animal Psychology

CognitiveScience(!)

Ethology


phase 3: examples

ComputationalNeuroscience

Computer Modeling

Physics(applied maths)

Neurobiology


mainstream cognitive science?

time

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08time

pluralism /fragmentation!

mainstream cognitive science?

what do you think?

[return to this]


Locating the paradigms: cognitivism

cognitivism


Locating connectionism (and beyond)

inner tension

cogsci model-toolkit (beyond symbol systems):

connectionist networks, graphs, maps, holograms, dyn. systems, agents, internal models, structured nets …

→ pragmatism, not truth

→ machine learning, etc.

[more about this→ modeling]

→ right tool for the right job


Locating embodied action

→ importing questions, explanatory strategies and worldviews from biologists into cognitive science

biological sciences

[more about this→ physiology]outer tension 1

→ via robotics


Locating situated cognition

→ making use of the concerns, worldview, and explanatory strategies of social scientists (and everyone working on environment/ecology)

socio-cultural sciences

outer tension 2 [more about this→ culture]

→ via social informatics


Locating paradigms

→ nicely explains the nature of these “revolutions“ (embodiment & situatedness)

→ broaden, not supplant traditional cogsci

→ common cause? excesses of cognitivism


Locating paradigms

→ nicely explains the nature of these “revolutions“ (embodiment & situatedness)

→ broaden, not supplant traditional cogsci

→ common cause? excesses of cognitivism

recommendation:look beyond situated cognition

recommendation:look beyond embodied action


pluralism / fragmentation:challenges & opportunities


traditional strategy


multidisciplinary field strategy

• pragmatic (usually little theoretical integration)

• proven to work

• partly the strategy of the study program: 2nd year

spend more time(+)

easier to work together

decide early on(-)

more narrow approach

• going directly for a new “multidisciplinary master?


more integrative / intercultural strategy?

• first step: take a step back → bigger picture

• need a set of maps rather than a list

• partly the goal of this seminar: analysis in terms of approaches

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08time [return to this]

A more optimistic view on current cognitive science:

many interesting new fields and new challenges popping up, but need for orientation – and integration?

Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08 6.3. 16-18 Intro 2: Introducing the Culture/Discipline Strand:

Documents

Transcript of Rossmanith, Reichelt SS08 6.3. 16-18 Intro 2: Introducing the Culture/Discipline Strand: