Massive Modularity and Psychological Essentialism

2011 ◽  
pp. 55-74
Author(s):  
Bradley Franks
2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1105-1106
Author(s):  
Peter Gärdenfors

Bloom argues that concepts depend on psychological essentialism. He rejects the proposal that concepts are based on perceptual similarity spaces because it cannot account for how we handle new properties and does not fit with our intuitions about essences. I argue that by using a broader notion of similarity space, it is possible to explain these features of concepts.


Author(s):  
Sheri Young

This chapter uses a case study, and supporting literature, to explore the function of Psychological Essentialism (the process of giving meaning to perceived “sameness”) in explaining tensions that often arise as we struggle to improve our understanding of diversity and inclusion in higher education, as well as in other social settings. The case study presented throughout the chapter was constructed as an amalgamation of experiences diverse faculty typically report while working on campuses struggling with recruiting and retaining diverse groups. It provides examples of experiences that occur on a range from malicious intent to those that occur, seemingly, without consciousness. The larger question is whether religious and social institutions approach essentialism and stereotyping differently, when it occurs. Seemingly, they do not. The conclusion of this chapter offers solutions for dealing with the barriers faced when attempting to create campus climates that are nurturing and supportive rather than hostile and exclusionary.


2011 ◽  
pp. 66-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna J. Bryson

Many architectures of mind assume some form of modularity, but what is meant by the term ‘module’? This chapter creates a framework for understanding current modularity research in three subdisciplines of cognitive science: psychology, artificial intelligence (AI), and neuroscience. This framework starts from the distinction between horizontal modules that support all expressed behaviors vs. vertical modules that support individual domain-specific capacities. The framework is used to discuss innateness, automaticity, compositionality, representations, massive modularity, behavior-based and multi-agent AI systems, and correspondence to physiological neurosystems. There is also a brief discussion of the relevance of modularity to conscious experience.


Author(s):  
Ian D Stephen ◽  
Darren Burke ◽  
Danielle Sulikowski
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document