Minds Without Meanings: An Essay on the Content of Concepts

In cognitive science, conceptual content is frequently understood as the "meaning" of a mental representation. This position raises largely empirical questions about what concepts are, what form they take in mental processes, and how they connect to the world they are about. In Minds without Meaning, Jerry Fodor and Zenon Pylyshyn review some of the proposals put forward to answer these questions and find that none of them is remotely defensible. Fodor and Pylyshyn determine that all of these proposals share a commitment to a two-factor theory of conceptual content, which holds that the content of a concept consists of its sense together with its reference. Fodor and Pylyshyn argue instead that there is no conclusive case against the possibility of a theory of concepts that takes reference as their sole semantic property. Such a theory, if correct, would provide for the naturalistic account of content that cognitive science lacks -- and badly needs. Fodor and Pylyshyn offer a sketch of how this theory might be developed into an account of perceptual reference that is broadly compatible with empirical findings and with the view that the mental processes effecting perceptual reference are largely preconceptual, modular, and encapsulated.

[1]  Marina Schmid,et al.  Imagery And Verbal Processes , 2016 .

[2]  J. Fodor ENOUGH WITH THE NORMS ALREADY , 2013 .

[3]  S. Franconeri The Nature and Status of Visual Resources , 2013 .

[4]  Steven L Franconeri,et al.  A simple proximity heuristic allows tracking of multiple objects through occlusion , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Jason M. Scimeca,et al.  Tracking Multiple Objects Is Limited Only by Object Spacing, Not by Speed, Time, or Capacity , 2010, Psychological science.

[6]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Measuring the attentional demand of multiple object tracking (MOT) , 2010 .

[7]  J. Bishop,et al.  Things and Places : How the Mind Connects with the World , 2010 .

[8]  Hannes Leitgeb,et al.  Reduction : between the mind and the brain , 2009 .

[9]  B. Scholl What Have We Learned about Attention from Multiple-Object Tracking (and Vice Versa)? , 2009 .

[10]  Brian D. Fisher,et al.  Evidence against a speed limit in multiple-object tracking , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  George A. Alvarez,et al.  How many objects can you attentively track?: Evidence for a resource-limited tracking mechanism , 2007 .

[12]  C. S. Green,et al.  Enumeration versus multiple object tracking: the case of action video game players , 2006, Cognition.

[13]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Is motion extrapolation employed in multiple object tracking? Tracking as a low-level, non-predictive function , 2006, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Dynamics of target selection in multiple object tracking (MOT). , 2006, Spatial vision.

[15]  Lana M. Trick,et al.  Multiple-object tracking in children: The "Catch the Spies" task. , 2005 .

[16]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[17]  安藤 広志,et al.  20世紀の名著名論:David Marr:Vision:a Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information , 2005 .

[18]  Catharine Abell,et al.  Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not What You Think , 2005 .

[19]  Z. Pylyshyn Return of the mental image: are there really pictures in the brain? , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[20]  M. Tarr,et al.  Visual Object Recognition , 1996, ISTCS.

[21]  A. Noë,et al.  A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. , 2001, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[22]  Z. Pylyshyn Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision , 2001, Cognition.

[23]  Hector,et al.  Fundamental Tradeoff in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning ( Revised Versionl ) , 2001 .

[24]  R. Kimchi,et al.  The perceptual organization of visual objects: a microgenetic analysis , 2000, Vision Research.

[25]  J. Fodor The Mind Doesn't Work That Way : The Scope and Limits of Computational Psychology , 2000 .

[26]  A. Clark A theory of sentience , 2000 .

[27]  Z. Pylyshyn Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. , 1999, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[28]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking Multiple Items Through Occlusion: Clues to Visual Objecthood , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See , 1998 .

[30]  S. Kosslyn Image and Brain: The Resolution of the Imagery Debate , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[31]  G. Sperling,et al.  Episodic theory of the dynamics of spatial attention. , 1995 .

[32]  M. Goodale,et al.  The visual brain in action , 1995 .

[33]  On the Microgenesis of Illusory Figures: A Failure to Replicate , 1994, Perception.

[34]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[35]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Repetition blindness and illusory conjunctions: errors in binding visual types with visual tokens. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  Kevin W. Bowyer,et al.  Aspect graphs: An introduction and survey of recent results , 1990, Int. J. Imaging Syst. Technol..

[38]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Solid shape , 1990 .

[39]  J. Koenderink The brain a geometry engine , 1990, Psychological research.

[40]  Elizabeth S. Spelke,et al.  Principles of Object Perception , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[41]  Z. Pylyshyn The role of location indexes in spatial perception: A sketch of the FINST spatial-index model , 1989, Cognition.

[42]  A. Treisman Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[43]  J. Fodor,et al.  Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis , 1988, Cognition.

[44]  A. Leslie The necessity of illusion: Perception and thought in infancy , 1988 .

[45]  G. Humphreys,et al.  To See But Not To See: A Case Study Of Visual Agnosia , 1987 .

[46]  A. Pentland Recognition by Parts , 1987 .

[47]  J. Fodor The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[48]  S Ullman,et al.  Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. , 1985, Human neurobiology.

[49]  J. Fodor,et al.  How direct is visual perception?: Some reflections on Gibson's “ecological approach” , 1981, Cognition.

[50]  E. Rosch,et al.  Categorization of Natural Objects , 1981 .

[51]  S. Ullman,et al.  The Interpretation of Visual Motion , 1981 .

[52]  D. Marr,et al.  Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes , 1978, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[53]  D. Lindberg,et al.  Theories of vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler , 1977, Medical History.

[54]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[55]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  What the Mind’s Eye Tells the Mind’s Brain: A Critique of Mental Imagery , 1973 .

[56]  Jaakko Hintikka,et al.  On the Logic of Perception , 1969 .

[57]  G. Sperling,et al.  Successive approximations to a model for short term memory. , 1967, Acta psychologica.

[58]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Word and Object , 1960 .

[59]  J. Burnheim Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics , 1959 .