CGSC270 Introduction to Cognitive Science

Examination #1

Answer both of the questions that follow. The answer to question #1 should take 4 pages maximum (2 pages for each choice); the answer to question #2 should take 2 pages maximum. All examinations are to be in printed form (hardcopy) and are due in class Sept. 18, 1998 (changed from Sept. 16, original due date). Late examinations are not accepted. Please see the class web site for other instructions and cautions: e.g., on proofing, copying, etc.

1. Describe the nature and significance of TWO of the following.

a. symbolism vs. connectionism

b. modularity vs. interactionism

c. levels of explanation

2. Briefly describe one commonsense or popular idea about how the mind works (i.e., something from folk psychology) and then show how this idea has to be revised, reworked, or reassessed in light of some of the principles of cognitive science that you have thus far learned. The idea you choose must NOT one we have discussed in class, that you have read in the assigned readings, that you are going to submit as a problem in the problem search, or that you used in the answer to #1 above. That is, it has to be NEW. Your answer must be specific, and you must make the case for rethinking this popular or commonsense idea.

Here are some examples to help you out:

A. One commonsense view of learning is that humans, animals, and machines learn by copying information to which they are exposed directly into their internal mental states: you learn exactly what you are exposed to. You could show how this idea is incorrect by describing the relevance of representation, inner models, functionalism, and intentionality.

B. Cognitive science holds that minds are instruction-using machines, but this is not what the popular view is, where machines and organic things are seen as excluding each other. But you could use ideas like computation, the Turing test, specs and the design stance, and the whole idea of mechanisms and abstract computation to argue that minds might in fact be understood as devices.