Information processing, computation, and cognition.

Journal of Biological Physics (Impact Factor: 1.15). 01/2011; 37(1):1-38. DOI: 10.1007/s10867-010-9195-3
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Computation and information processing are among the most fundamental notions in cognitive science. They are also among the most imprecisely discussed. Many cognitive scientists take it for granted that cognition involves computation, information processing, or both - although others disagree vehemently. Yet different cognitive scientists use 'computation' and 'information processing' to mean different things, sometimes without realizing that they do. In addition, computation and information processing are surrounded by several myths; first and foremost, that they are the same thing. In this paper, we address this unsatisfactory state of affairs by presenting a general and theory-neutral account of computation and information processing. We also apply our framework by analyzing the relations between computation and information processing on one hand and classicism, connectionism, and computational neuroscience on the other. We defend the relevance to cognitive science of both computation, at least in a generic sense, and information processing, in three important senses of the term. Our account advances several foundational debates in cognitive science by untangling some of their conceptual knots in a theory-neutral way. By leveling the playing field, we pave the way for the future resolution of the debates' empirical aspects.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper seeks to understand machine cognition. The nature of machine cognition has been shrouded in incomprehensibility. We have often encountered familiar arguments in cognitive science that human cognition is still faintly understood. This paper will argue that machine cognition is far less understood than even human cognition despite the fact that a lot about computer architecture and computational operations is known. Even if there have been putative claims about the transparency of the notion of machine computations, these claims do not hold out in unraveling machine cognition, let alone machine consciousness (if there is any such thing). The nature and form of machine cognition remains further confused also because of attempts to explain human cognition in terms of computation and to model/simulate (aspects of) human cognitive processing in machines. Given that these problems in characterizing machine cognition persist, a view of machine cognition that aims to avoid these problems is outlined. The argument that is advanced is that something becomes a computation in machines only when a human interprets it, which is a kind of semiotic causation. From this it follows that a computing machine is not engaged in a computation unless a human interprets what it is doing; instead, it is engaged in machine cognition, which is defined as a member or subset of the set of all possible mappings of inputs to outputs. The human interpretation, which is a semiotic process, gives meaning to what a machine does, and then what it does becomes a computation.
    Biosemiotics 04/2013; 7(1):97-110. DOI:10.1007/s12304-013-9179-3 · 0.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study is circumscribed to the Information Science. The zetetic aim of research is double: a) to define the concept of action of information computational processing and b) to design a taxonomy of actions of information computational processing. Our thesis is that any information processing is a computational processing. First, the investigation trays to demonstrate that the computational actions of information processing or the informational actions are computational-investigative configurations for structuring information: clusters of highly-aggregated operations which are carried out in a unitary manner operate convergent and behave like a unique computational device. From a methodological point of view, they are comprised within the category of analytical instruments for the informational processing of raw material, of data, of vague, confused, unstructured informational elements. As internal articulation, the actions are patterns for the integrated carrying out of operations of informational investigation. Secondly, we propose an inventory and a description of five basic informational computational actions: exploring, grouping, anticipation, schematization, inferential structuring. R. S. Wyer and T. K. Srull (2014) speak about " four information processing " . We would like to continue with further and future investigation of the relationship between operations, actions, strategies and mechanisms of informational processing.
  • 09/2014; 27(3):441-459. DOI:10.1007/s13347-014-0164-9

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
May 26, 2014