Jerry Fodor’s Modularity of Mind is a beginning [It] is the first major monograph in this century to explore some variations on faculty psychology [and] is the best. Where Fodor (, ) draws the line of modularity at the Perceptual plasticity and theoretical neutrality: A reply to Jerry Fodor. John C. Marshall, The Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, – Alvin Liberman, Yale University, President, Haskins Laboratories ” Jerry Fodor’s “Modularity of Mind “is a.

Author: Magrel Mauzil
Country: Costa Rica
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Love
Published (Last): 9 June 2016
Pages: 483
PDF File Size: 7.4 Mb
ePub File Size: 4.4 Mb
ISBN: 861-4-54699-449-2
Downloads: 34312
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mezirn

But speed is relative, so the best way to proceed here is by way of examples. Cognitive Adaptations for Social Exchange. Dustin Stokes – – Philosophy Compass 8 7: Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

This isn’t a mediocre book as the rating stars might suggest, it’s actually a very superb, original, and influential book by Jerry A. Evolutionary theories using the idea of numerous domain-specific adaptions have produced testable predictions that have been empirically confirmed; the theory of domain-general rational thought has produced no such predictions or confirmations.

In other words, is the brain specifically adapted to doing certain things and not others? Jul 31, Tian Liang rated it it was amazing. Most psychologists study horizontal processes like memory and information flow; Fodor postulates a vertical and modular psychological organization underlying biologically coherent behaviors. Webarchive template wayback links All articles with dead external links Articles with dead external links from February Articles modulatity permanently dead external links.


The Modularity of Mind – Jerry A. Fodor – Google Books

This study synthesizes current information from the various fields of cognitive science in support of a new and exciting theory of mind. Science Logic and Mathematics. Suppose that a system is massively modular in organization. Melina Cunelius rated it really liked it Jan 12, This view of mental architecture is consistent with the historical tradition of faculty psychology while integrating a computational approach to mental processes.

It’s domain specific because my language faculty maps representations specifically different from those my visual faculty maps.

While discussing Neo-Cartesianism, Fodor draws the distinction between innate faculties: The author devotes much space to the question of the relative extent of processing of input within the input system versus within the central processor. Though modularitg success of these deployments of modularity theory is subject to dispute e.

Modularity of mind – Wikipedia

Central Systems Fodor perceives little evidence to explicate central processes, so he reverts to analogy. And that is all the argument really requires. The concept of modularity has also figured in recent debates in philosophy of science, epistemology, ethics, and philosophy of language—further evidence of its utility as a tool for theorizing about mental architecture.


In the course of that discussion, we reviewed a representative sample of this evidence, and for present purposes that should suffice.

Barrett Jay Belsky David F. Such ideas go back to ancient Greece; a good current exemplar is what modern psychology believes about long-term memory.

The Modularity of Mind

Fodor states that modular systems must—at least to “some interesting extent”—fulfill certain properties:. East Dane Designer Men’s Fashion.

When Nietzsche made fun of him, by ridiculing the explanatory device of invoking a faculty, Nietzsche revealed two things: Input systems have certain common characteristics that warrant giving them a specific classification. A roadmap for the cognitive scientist. The author gives an example of a ferocious animal nearby; best play safe even if this means jumping to a conclusion. Cognitive structural maturation occurs in an innately-specified way.

Modularity and interaction of brain regions underlying visuomotor coordination. What can individual differences tell us about the specialization of function?

Put in slightly different terms: See what you want to see: