Cargando…

Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate

The rise of Bayesianism in cognitive science promises to shape the debate between nativists and empiricists into more productive forms—or so have claimed several philosophers and cognitive scientists. The present paper explicates this claim, distinguishing different ways of understanding it. After c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Colombo, Matteo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6404666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30930498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1427-7
_version_ 1783400936749662208
author Colombo, Matteo
author_facet Colombo, Matteo
author_sort Colombo, Matteo
collection PubMed
description The rise of Bayesianism in cognitive science promises to shape the debate between nativists and empiricists into more productive forms—or so have claimed several philosophers and cognitive scientists. The present paper explicates this claim, distinguishing different ways of understanding it. After clarifying what is at stake in the controversy between nativists and empiricists, and what is involved in current Bayesian cognitive science, the paper argues that Bayesianism offers not a vindication of either nativism or empiricism, but one way to talk precisely and transparently about the kinds of mechanisms and representations underlying the acquisition of psychological traits without a commitment to an innate language of thought.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6404666
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64046662019-03-27 Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate Colombo, Matteo Synthese Article The rise of Bayesianism in cognitive science promises to shape the debate between nativists and empiricists into more productive forms—or so have claimed several philosophers and cognitive scientists. The present paper explicates this claim, distinguishing different ways of understanding it. After clarifying what is at stake in the controversy between nativists and empiricists, and what is involved in current Bayesian cognitive science, the paper argues that Bayesianism offers not a vindication of either nativism or empiricism, but one way to talk precisely and transparently about the kinds of mechanisms and representations underlying the acquisition of psychological traits without a commitment to an innate language of thought. Springer Netherlands 2017-05-22 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6404666/ /pubmed/30930498 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1427-7 Text en © Springer Nature B.V. 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Colombo, Matteo
Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title_full Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title_fullStr Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title_full_unstemmed Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title_short Bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
title_sort bayesian cognitive science, predictive brains, and the nativism debate
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6404666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30930498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1427-7
work_keys_str_mv AT colombomatteo bayesiancognitivesciencepredictivebrainsandthenativismdebate