Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:34:59.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abstract analogies not primed by relations learned as object transformations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2008

Steven Phillips
Steven Phillips
Affiliation:
Neuroscience Research Institute, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Tsukuba, 305-8568, Japan. [email protected]://staff.aist.go.jp/steven.phillips
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Analogy by priming learned transformations of (causally) related objects fails to explain an important class of inference involving abstract source-target relations. This class of analogical inference extends to ad hoc relationships, precluding the possibility of having learned them as object transformations. Rather, objects may be placed into momentarily corresponding, symbolic, source-target relationships just to complete an analogy.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , August 2008 , pp. 393 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aizawa, K. (2002) The systematicity arguments, studies in brain and mind. Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1988) Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition 28:3–71.Google Scholar
Halford, G. S., Bain, J. D., Maybery, M. T. & Andrews, G. (1998) Induction of relational schemas: Common processes in reasoning and complex learning. Cognitive Psychology 35(3):201–45.Google Scholar
Kendler, T. S. (1995) Levels of cognitive development. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Phillips, S. (1999) Systematic minds, unsystematic models: Learning transfer in humans and networks. Minds and Machines 9(3):383–98.Google Scholar
Phillips, S. (2000) Constituent similarity and systematicity: The limits of first-order connectionism. Connection Science 12(1):45–63.Google Scholar
Phillips, S. (2007) Kennith Aizawa, the systematicity arguments, studies in brain and mind. Minds and Machines 17(3):357–60.Google Scholar