Publikation: Make up your mind : octopus cognition and hybrid explanations
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
In order to argue that cognitive science should be more accepting of explanatory plurality, this paper presents the control of fetching movements in the octopus as an exemplar of a cognitive process that comprises distinct and non-redundant representation-using and non-representational elements. Fetching is a type of movement that representational analyses can normally account for completely—but not in the case of the octopus. Instead, a comprehensive account of octopus fetching requires the non-overlapping use of both representational and non-representational explanatory frameworks. What this need for a pluralistic or hybrid explanation implies is that cognitive science should be more open to using both representational and nonrepresentational accounts of cognition, depending on their respective appropriateness to the type of cognition in question.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
CARLS-DIAMANTE, Sidney, 2021. Make up your mind : octopus cognition and hybrid explanations. In: Synthese. Springer. 2021, 199(Supplement 1), pp. 143-158. ISSN 0039-7857. eISSN 1573-0964. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11229-019-02102-2BibTex
@article{CarlsDiamante2021octop-53024, year={2021}, doi={10.1007/s11229-019-02102-2}, title={Make up your mind : octopus cognition and hybrid explanations}, number={Supplement 1}, volume={199}, issn={0039-7857}, journal={Synthese}, pages={143--158}, author={Carls-Diamante, Sidney} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/53024"> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:title>Make up your mind : octopus cognition and hybrid explanations</dcterms:title> <dc:contributor>Carls-Diamante, Sidney</dc:contributor> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/53024"/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-26T12:49:37Z</dc:date> <dc:creator>Carls-Diamante, Sidney</dc:creator> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-02-26T12:49:37Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">In order to argue that cognitive science should be more accepting of explanatory plurality, this paper presents the control of fetching movements in the octopus as an exemplar of a cognitive process that comprises distinct and non-redundant representation-using and non-representational elements. Fetching is a type of movement that representational analyses can normally account for completely—but not in the case of the octopus. Instead, a comprehensive account of octopus fetching requires the non-overlapping use of both representational and non-representational explanatory frameworks. What this need for a pluralistic or hybrid explanation implies is that cognitive science should be more open to using both representational and nonrepresentational accounts of cognition, depending on their respective appropriateness to the type of cognition in question.</dcterms:abstract> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>