PHIL 3440: Cognitive Science Midtermm Tuesday, October 30

On test day, you will be asked to answer 2 questions one from each group below.  THE QUESTIONS WILL BE RANDOMLY SELECTED.  This means you should prepare an answer to each question below.

The test will be closed book, closed notes.  You will have 60 minutes to finish, so plan to spend approximately half that time on each question. BRING A LARGE BLUE BOOK.

CHEATING WILL RESULT IN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:

(1) A FAILING GRADE FOR THE COURSE.

(2) A LETTER SENT TO THE VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS.

(3) A LETTER SENT TO THE CHAIR OF YOUR MAJORING DEPARTMENT.

Group 1.   

1. Explain the distinction between syntax and semantics.  Give two reasons to think that the mind is a 'syntactic engine', and explain what Haugeland means when he writes: "If you take care of the syntax, the semantics will take care of itself."

2.  Fodor offers a number of arguments for why there must be a language of thought or mental representation.  Assess ONE of these arguments in light of Dennett's concern about 'misplaced concreteness' or Churchland's eliminativism.

3.  On Dennett's view,  mental states are what Clark calls "stance-dependent."  Is this problematic?  If so, discuss whether or not this failure lends support to Fodor's language of thought hypothesis or Churchland's eliminativism.  If being stance-dependence is not problematic, explain why not.

Group 2. 

4.  Explain how connectionist accounts of the mind seem to deviate from the classical conception. Briefly recapitulate one argument for them, and one against. Is either persuasive?

5.  Clark writes:  "We have seen how details of bodily mechanics (synergies of tendons, etc.) and embodied action taking (moving, visual saccades, etc.) can radically transform the shape of the computational problems faced by a real-world agent."

Explain why Clark thinks details of mechanics and action call into question the practical value of a three level schema dividing the task analysis, the computation, and the implementation into neat and distinct levels. Assess whether Clark is right.

6. Clark suggests that "artificial life aims to reconfigure the sciences of the mind by emphasizing the importance of factors other than rich, individual computation and cogitation" (109). Discuss one of Clark's examples, and explain how it poses a prima facie challenge to the idea of rich, symbolic computation as a means of solving real-world problems. Briefly assess whether the challenge is persuasive.