Switch to: References

Citations of:

Is The Connectionist-Logicist Debate One of AI's Wonderful Red Herrings?

Selmer Bringsjord

Journal of Theoretical and Experimental Artificial Intelligence 3:319-49 (1991)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

The Ubiquity of Computation.Eric Dietrich - 1993 - Think (misc) 2 (June):27-29.details For many years now, Harnad has argued that transduction is special among cognitive capacities -- special enough to block Searle's Chinese Room Argument. His arguments (as well as Searle's) have been important and useful, but not correct, it seems to me. Their arguments have provided the modern impetus for getting clear about computationalism and the nature of computing. This task has proven to be quite difficult. Which is simply to say that dealing with Harnad's arguments (as well as Searle's) has (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Superminds: People Harness Hypercomputation, and More.Mark Phillips, Selmer Bringsjord & M. Zenzen - 2003 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Verlag.details When Ken Malone investigates a case of something causing mental static across the United States, he is teleported to a world that doesn't exist. Download Export citation Bookmark 9 citations
Computation, among other things, is beneath us.Selmer Bringsjord - 1994 - Minds and Machines 4 (4):469-88.details What''s computation? The received answer is that computation is a computer at work, and a computer at work is that which can be modelled as a Turing machine at work. Unfortunately, as John Searle has recently argued, and as others have agreed, the received answer appears to imply that AI and Cog Sci are a royal waste of time. The argument here is alarmingly simple: AI and Cog Sci (of the Strong sort, anyway) are committed to the view that cognition (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 9 citations
Cognition is not computation: The argument from irreversibility.Selmer Bringsjord - 1997 - Synthese 113 (2):285-320.details The dominant scientific and philosophical view of the mind – according to which, put starkly, cognition is computation – is refuted herein, via specification and defense of the following new argument: Computation is reversible; cognition isn't; ergo, cognition isn't computation. After presenting a sustained dialectic arising from this defense, we conclude with a brief preview of the view we would put in place of the cognition-is-computation doctrine. Download Export citation Bookmark 8 citations
Creativity, the Turing test, and the (better) Lovelace test.Selmer Bringsjord, P. Bello & David A. Ferrucci - 2001 - Minds and Machines 11 (1):3-27.details The Turing Test is claimed by many to be a way to test for the presence, in computers, of such ``deep'' phenomena as thought and consciousness. Unfortunately, attempts to build computational systems able to pass TT have devolved into shallow symbol manipulation designed to, by hook or by crook, trick. The human creators of such systems know all too well that they have merely tried to fool those people who interact with their systems into believing that these systems really have (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 26 citations
Logic and artificial intelligence: Divorced, still married, separated ...? [REVIEW]Selmer Bringsjord & David A. Ferrucci - 1998 - Minds and Machines 8 (2):273-308.details Though it''s difficult to agree on the exact date of their union, logic and artificial intelligence (AI) were married by the late 1950s, and, at least during their honeymoon, were happily united. What connubial permutation do logic and AI find themselves in now? Are they still (happily) married? Are they divorced? Or are they only separated, both still keeping alive the promise of a future in which the old magic is rekindled? This paper is an attempt to answer these questions (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 3 citations

1