Two Threats To Representation

I consider two threats to the idea that on-line intelligent behaviour (the production offluid and adaptable responses to ongoing sensory input) must or should be explainedby appeal to neurally located representations. The first of these threats occurs whenextra-neural factors account for the kind of behavioural richness and flexibility normallyassociated with representation-based control. I show how this anti-representationalchallenge can be met, if we apply the thought that, to be a representational system,an action-oriented neural system must not only be the source of at least some of theobserved behavioural richness and flexibility, it must also feature two architecturaltraits, namely arbitrariness and homuncularity. Unfortunately, however, this solutionopens the door to our second threat to representation. The homuncularity conditionwill not be met by any system in which the causal contribution of each component ismassively context-sensitive and variable over time. I end by discussing the empiricalbet that biological nervous systems will not exhibit this style of causation.

[1]  D. Cliff From animals to animats 3 : proceedings of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior , 1994 .

[2]  Geoffrey E. Hinton Untimed and Misrepresented: Connectionism and the Computer Metaphor Untimed and Misrepresented: Connectionism and the Computer Metaphor , 1992 .

[3]  Inman Harvey,et al.  Seeing the Light: Artiicial Evolution, Real Vision Seeing the Light: Artiicial Evolution, Real Vision , 1994 .

[4]  Ruth Garrett Millikan,et al.  White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice. , 1984 .

[5]  W. Wimsatt Forms of Aggregativity , 1986 .

[6]  T. Gelder,et al.  Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition , 1995 .

[7]  Barbara Webb,et al.  Robotic experiments in cricket phonotaxis , 1994 .

[8]  Adrian Thompson,et al.  Evolving Electronic Robot Controller that Exploit Hardware Resources , 1995, ECAL.

[9]  E. Reed The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1989 .

[10]  Michael Wheeler,et al.  Explaining the Evolved: Homunculi, Modules, and Internal Representation , 1998, EvoRobot.

[11]  G. Globus Toward a Noncomputational Cognitive Neuroscience , 1992, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[12]  N. Franceschini,et al.  From insect vision to robot vision , 1992 .

[13]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  Inman Harvey,et al.  Circle in the round: State space attractors for evolved sighted robots , 1995, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[15]  H. Hendriks-Jansen Catching Ourselves in the Act: Situated Activity, Interactive Emergence, Evolution, and Human Thought , 1996 .

[16]  J. Gibson The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[17]  T. Gelder,et al.  What Might Cognition Be, If Not Computation? , 1995 .

[18]  Randall D. Beer,et al.  Computational and dynamical languages for autonomous agents , 1996 .

[19]  A. Clark,et al.  Genic Representation: Reconciling Content and Causal Complexity , 1999, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[20]  M. Martin White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice , 1995 .

[21]  R. A. Brooks,et al.  Intelligence without Representation , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[22]  D. Lewkowicz,et al.  A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. , 2007, Journal of cognitive neuroscience.

[23]  A. Clark Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again , 1996 .

[24]  Kim Sterelny The Representational Theory of Mind: An Introduction , 1991 .