The nature of symbols in the language of thought

Mind and Language 24 (5):523-553 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The core of the language of thought program is the claim that thinking is the manipulation of symbols according to rules. Yet LOT has said little about symbol natures, and existing accounts are highly controversial. This is a major flaw at the heart of the LOT program: LOT requires an account of symbol natures to naturalize intentionality, to determine whether the brain even engages in symbol manipulations, and to understand how symbols relate to lower-level neurocomputational states. This paper provides the much-needed theory of symbols, and in doing so, alters the LOT program in significant respects.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,785

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
372 (#79,181)

6 months
5 (#879,729)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Susan Schneider
Florida Atlantic University

Citations of this work

Rule-Following II: Recent Work and New Puzzles.Indrek Reiland - 2024 - Philosophy Compass 19 (5):e12976.
The language of thought hypothesis.Murat Aydede - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Picturing, signifying, and attending.Bryce Huebner - 2018 - Belgrade Philosophical Annual 1 (31):7-40.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations