Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Modal—Amodal Distinction in the Debate on Conceptual Format.Sabrina Haimovici - 2018 - Philosophies 3 (2):7.
    In this paper, I review the main criteria offered for distinguishing the modal and amodal approaches to conceptual format: the type of input to which the representations respond, the relation they bear to perceptual states, and the specific neural systems to which they belong. I evaluate different interpretations of them and argue that they all face difficulties. I further show that they lead to cross-classifications of certain types of representations, using approximate number representations as an example.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Review of Beyond Concepts: Unicepts, Language, and Natural Information. [REVIEW]Mikio Akagi - 2020 - Philosophical Quarterly 70 (278):199-201.
    Beyond Concepts: Unicepts, Language, and Natural Information. By Millikan Ruth Garrett.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Mapas, lenguaje y conceptos: hacia una teoría pluralista del formato de los conceptos.Mariela Aguilera - 2020 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 24 (1):121-146.
    A great number of investigations suggest that cognition involves both linguistic and cartographic representations. These researches have motivated a pluralist conception of cognition; also, they have been used to clarify how maps differ from linguistic representations. However, the computational processes underlying the interphase between both kinds of representations deserve further attention. In this paper, I argue that, despite their differences, cartographic representations coexist and interact with linguistic representations in interesting ways.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Three symbol ungrounding problems: Abstract concepts and the future of embodied cognition.Guy Dove - 2016 - Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 4 (23):1109-1121.
    A great deal of research has focused on the question of whether or not concepts are embodied as a rule. Supporters of embodiment have pointed to studies that implicate affective and sensorimotor systems in cognitive tasks, while critics of embodiment have offered nonembodied explanations of these results and pointed to studies that implicate amodal systems. Abstract concepts have tended to be viewed as an important test case in this polemical debate. This essay argues that we need to move beyond a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations