Q4 Arts and Humanities
M. Piekarski
{"title":"Spór o ciągłość życia i umysłu. Argumenty na rzecz kognitywizmu","authors":"M. Piekarski","doi":"10.24917/20841043.11.1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dispute over the continuity of life and mind. Arguments for cognitivism: The purpose of this paper is to discuss the position of non-cognitivism on the issue of the so-called dispute over the continuity / discontinuity of life and mind. In discussing the views of Michael Kirchhoff and Tom Froese, I will point out some difficulties related to their position. Next, I will formulate three arguments in favor of the cognitive alternative, emphasizing the need to resort to semantic information in explaining these phenomena. According to noncognitivist position, there is a continuity in the life-mind line, which can be justified by referring to the concept of Shannon’s syntactic information. Opponents of this thesis, i.e. supporters of cognitivism, claim that the explanation of cognition requires the use of other tools than those used to explanation of life, because, first, the notion of syntactic information does not exhaust the complexity of these phenomena, and, second, the non-cognitive position raises many problems and ambiguities. According to cognitivists, when explaining life and mind, one should refer to the concept of semantic information that is rejected by noncognitivists. In the Conclusion I will analyze the ambiguities and assumptions related to the thesis about the continuity or discontinuity between life and cognitive processes.","PeriodicalId":30403,"journal":{"name":"Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24917/20841043.11.1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于生命和精神的连续性的争论。认知主义的争论:本文的目的是讨论非认知主义在所谓生命和心灵的连续性/非连续性争论问题上的立场。在讨论Michael Kirchhoff和Tom Froese的观点时,我将指出与他们的立场相关的一些困难。接下来,我将阐述支持认知替代的三个论点,强调在解释这些现象时需要诉诸语义信息。根据非认知主义的立场,生命-心灵线具有连续性,这可以通过香农的句法信息概念来证明。这篇论文的反对者,即认知主义的支持者,声称对认知的解释需要使用其他工具,而不是用来解释生命的工具,因为,首先,句法信息的概念并没有穷尽这些现象的复杂性,其次,非认知立场提出了许多问题和歧义。根据认知主义者的观点,在解释生命和心灵时,应该参考语义信息的概念,而这一概念被非认知主义者所拒绝。在结论中,我将分析与论文有关的关于生命和认知过程之间的连续性或不连续性的模糊性和假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spór o ciągłość życia i umysłu. Argumenty na rzecz kognitywizmu
The dispute over the continuity of life and mind. Arguments for cognitivism: The purpose of this paper is to discuss the position of non-cognitivism on the issue of the so-called dispute over the continuity / discontinuity of life and mind. In discussing the views of Michael Kirchhoff and Tom Froese, I will point out some difficulties related to their position. Next, I will formulate three arguments in favor of the cognitive alternative, emphasizing the need to resort to semantic information in explaining these phenomena. According to noncognitivist position, there is a continuity in the life-mind line, which can be justified by referring to the concept of Shannon’s syntactic information. Opponents of this thesis, i.e. supporters of cognitivism, claim that the explanation of cognition requires the use of other tools than those used to explanation of life, because, first, the notion of syntactic information does not exhaust the complexity of these phenomena, and, second, the non-cognitive position raises many problems and ambiguities. According to cognitivists, when explaining life and mind, one should refer to the concept of semantic information that is rejected by noncognitivists. In the Conclusion I will analyze the ambiguities and assumptions related to the thesis about the continuity or discontinuity between life and cognitive processes.
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
Argument  Biannual Philosophical Journal
Argument Biannual Philosophical Journal Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信