认知代理中的同步假说：评帕克斯顿、内凯斯等人和认知科学中的动态假说》。

IF 2.9 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL

Topics in Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2024-11-11 DOI:10.1111/tops.12772

Jamie C Gorman

{"title":"认知代理中的同步假说：评帕克斯顿、内凯斯等人和认知科学中的动态假说》。","authors":"Jamie C Gorman","doi":"10.1111/tops.12772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The 1998 article by van Gelder proposed a Dynamical Hypothesis (DH) in cognitive science consisting of Nature (cognitive agents are dynamical systems) and Knowledge (cognitive agents should be understood dynamically) hypotheses in contrast to the Computational Hypothesis (CH) that cognitive agents are computers. My commentary focuses on the contributions of Paxton and Necaise et al. in interpersonal motor coordination and radicalization across social media. I do not think that either contribution supports the Nature hypothesis but does conform with the Knowledge hypothesis. I conclude by describing cognitive agents as living systems (or nonliving systems that mimic aspects of living systems) that can be alternately viewed to support the DH or CH or both at the same time.","PeriodicalId":47822,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Cognitive Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simultaneous Hypotheses in Cognitive Agents: Commentary on Paxton, Necaise et al., and the Dynamical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science.\",\"authors\":\"Jamie C Gorman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/tops.12772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The 1998 article by van Gelder proposed a Dynamical Hypothesis (DH) in cognitive science consisting of Nature (cognitive agents are dynamical systems) and Knowledge (cognitive agents should be understood dynamically) hypotheses in contrast to the Computational Hypothesis (CH) that cognitive agents are computers. My commentary focuses on the contributions of Paxton and Necaise et al. in interpersonal motor coordination and radicalization across social media. I do not think that either contribution supports the Nature hypothesis but does conform with the Knowledge hypothesis. I conclude by describing cognitive agents as living systems (or nonliving systems that mimic aspects of living systems) that can be alternately viewed to support the DH or CH or both at the same time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47822,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Topics in Cognitive Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Topics in Cognitive Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12772\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12772","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

范盖尔德在 1998 年的文章中提出了认知科学中的动态假说（DH），包括自然假说（认知代理是动态系统）和知识假说（认知代理应被动态理解），与认知代理是计算机的计算假说（CH）形成对比。我的评论侧重于帕克斯顿和内凯斯等人在人际运动协调和社交媒体激进化方面的贡献。我认为这两项贡献都不支持 "自然 "假说，但符合 "知识 "假说。最后，我将认知代理描述为活体系统（或模仿活体系统某些方面的非活体系统），它们可以被视为支持自然假说或知识假说，或同时支持这两种假说。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Simultaneous Hypotheses in Cognitive Agents: Commentary on Paxton, Necaise et al., and the Dynamical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science.

The 1998 article by van Gelder proposed a Dynamical Hypothesis (DH) in cognitive science consisting of Nature (cognitive agents are dynamical systems) and Knowledge (cognitive agents should be understood dynamically) hypotheses in contrast to the Computational Hypothesis (CH) that cognitive agents are computers. My commentary focuses on the contributions of Paxton and Necaise et al. in interpersonal motor coordination and radicalization across social media. I do not think that either contribution supports the Nature hypothesis but does conform with the Knowledge hypothesis. I conclude by describing cognitive agents as living systems (or nonliving systems that mimic aspects of living systems) that can be alternately viewed to support the DH or CH or both at the same time.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Topics in Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-

CiteScore

8.50

自引率

10.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS) is an innovative new journal that covers all areas of cognitive science including cognitive modeling, cognitive neuroscience, cognitive anthropology, and cognitive science and philosophy. topiCS aims to provide a forum for: -New communities of researchers- New controversies in established areas- Debates and commentaries- Reflections and integration The publication features multiple scholarly papers dedicated to a single topic. Some of these topics will appear together in one issue, but others may appear across several issues or develop into a regular feature. Controversies or debates started in one issue may be followed up by commentaries in a later issue, etc. However, the format and origin of the topics will vary greatly.