It is argued that current attempts to model human learning behavior commonly fail on one of two counts: either the model assumptions are artificially restricted so as to permit the application of mathematical techniques in deriving their consequences, or else the required complex assumptions are imbedded in computer programs whose technical details obscure the theoretical content of the model. The first failing is characteristic of so-called mathematical models of learning, while the second is characteristic of computer simulation models. An approach (...) to model building which avoids both these failings is presented under the title of a black-box theory of learning. This method permits the statement of assumptions of any desired complexity in a language which clearly exhibits their theoretical content.Section II of the paper is devoted to the problem of testing and comparing alternative learning theories. The policy advocated is to abandon attempts at hypothesis testing. It is argued that, in general, we not only lack sufficient data and sufficiently powerful techniques to test hypotheses, but that the truth of a model is not really the issue of basic interest. A given model may be true in the sense that on the basis of available evidence we cannot statistically reject it, but not interesting in the sense that it provides little information about the processes underlying behavior. Rather, we should accept or reject models on the basis of how much information they provide about the way in which subjects respond to environmental structure. This attitude toward model testing is made precise by introducing a formal measure of the information content of a model. Finally, it is argued that the statistical concept of degrees-of-freedom is misleading when used in the context of model testing and should be replaced by a measure of the information absorbed from the data in estimating parameters. (shrink)

What is the relation between a reason and an action when the reason explains the action by giving the agent's reason for doing what he did? We may call such explanations rationalizations, and say that the reason rationalizes the action. In this paper I want to defend the ancient - and common-sense - position that rationalization is a species of ordinary causal explanation. The defense no doubt requires some redeployment, but not more or less complete abandonment of the position, as (...) urged by many recent writers. (shrink)

This paper examines problems of order and periodicity which arise when the attempt is made to define a confirmation function for a language containing elementary number theory as applied to a universe in which the individuals are considered to be arranged in some fixed order. Certain plausible conditions of adequacy are stated for such a confirmation function. By the construction of certain types of predicates, it is proved, however, that these conditions of adequacy are violated by any confirmation function defined (...) for the type of language in question. Various possible solutions to these difficulties are explored and found to be inadequate. In particular, a proposal which stems from the suggestion to restrict a fundamental principle of confirmation to hypotheses containing only non-positional predicates is cited. This proposal, however, is shown to prevent confirmation functions from taking periodicities into account, and so is deemed unsatisfactory. A general theorem is proved to the effect that if non-positional predicates are taken to satisfy the conditions of adequacy which have been formulated, then no periodicity predicates whatsoever (i.e., predicates used in formulating hypotheses which foretell periodicities) can be subject to these conditions, on pain of contradiction. Yet it seems that periodicity predicates must be subject to these conditions of adequacy if a confirmation function is to recognize periodic occurrences. Thus, an impasse seems to be reached. In the final sections we consider the beginnings of one possible solution to these difficulties. Our proposal involves treating sets of individuals, rather than individuals themselves, as instances of an hypothesis which predicts a periodicity. On this basis we formulate new conditions of adequacy which are free from the previous difficulties and which will permit a confirmation function that satisfies them to take periodicities into account. (shrink)

”Rotu” mielletään usein pelkästään biologiseksi käsitteeksi. Niinpä rasismista syytetyt toisinaan puolustautuvat julkisuudessa sanomalla, että he eivät ole biologisten rotuoppien kannattajia, vaan esimerkiksi vain kannattavat kulttuurien oikeutta olla erilaisia. Historiallisissa yhteyksissä menneiden aikojen ajattelijoita saatetaan puolustaa sillä, että he eivät olleet ainakaan biologisia rasisteja. Erottelun taustalla on olettamus, että biologiaa koskevat ja kulttuuria koskevat käsitykset voidaan ongelmattomasti erottaa toisistaan. Tämän esityksen yhtenä pyrkimyksenä on pohtia biologia vs. kulttuuri -erottelun merkitystä rotua koskevissa käsityksissä, ja problematisoida sitä. Tarkastelun aineistona käytetään 1800-luvun lopun ja (...) 1900-luvun alun vaikutusvaltaisimpia ”klassisia” rotuteorioita. Näitä näkemyksiä luonnehditaan yleensä ”biologisiksi”. Vaikka rotuteorioiden juuria on etsitty antiikista saakka, ja vaikka eri vuosisatojen ajattelijoilta on helppo poimia rotuennakkoluuloja heijastavia kommentteja, tarkasteltuna ajanjaksona laskettiin se teoreettinen perusta, joille esimerkiksi 1930- ja 1940-lukujen rasistiset käytännöt rakennettiin. Harva enää vaivautuu lukemaan tuon aikakauden rotuteoreetikkoja tai edes tunnistaa heidän nimensä: rotuteoriat ovat tyypillistä pseudotiedettä, vailla itsenäistä älyllistä arvoa. Kuitenkin johtavien rotuteoreetikkojen kirjoitukset käännettiin aikanaan useimmille eurooppalaisille kielille, ja niitä myytiin satoja tuhansia kappaleita. Rotuajattelusta tuli liberalismin, sosialismin ja kommunismin kaltainen vaikuttava yhteiskunnallinen virtaus. Sen historiallisesti tunnetuin ilmaus oli Saksan kansallissosialismi, mutta lähes kaikissa Euroopan maissa – ja monissa Euroopan ulkopuolisissa maissa – syntyi paikallisesti värittyneitä versioita rotuopeista. Useimmissa maissa nämä opit syntyivät jo ennen kuin kansallissosialismista tuli Saksan hallitseva ideologia. Yhtäältä rotuopit sekoittuivat vanhempiin, kielellisesti ja kulttuurisesti muotoiltuihin nationalismin versioihin. Toisaalta ne kytkeytyivät usein biologisin käsittein muotoiltuihin ideoihin rodun parantelusta. Silti rotuopit erottuvat käsitteellisesti ja teoreettisesti sekä ”pelkästä” nationalismista että ”pelkästä” rotuhygieniasta. Tämän esityksen muina tavoitteina on pyrkiä muodostamaan historiallisesti ja filosofisesti täsmällisempi käsitys rasismia tukevasta ajattelusta. Samalla rotuopit toimivat kiinnostavana ja varoittavana esimerkkinä politiikan käyttöön valjastetun pseudotieteen argumentaatiotavoista. (shrink)

A feature of the spiritual physiognomy of the twentieth century has been belief in "progress" and in the beneficial influence on human wellbeing of science and technology. Wittgenstein never shares these optimistic sentiments. Towards the end of his life he wrote that there is nothing absurd in the belief that the age of science and technology is "the beginning of the end of humanity" and that mankind steering its course towards the future relying on scientific rationality "is falling into a (...) trap. His life and also his philosophy was a protest against these trends and a search for "a changed mode of thought and life". (shrink)