On Communication and Computation
 Paul Bohan Broderick
 … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discount
Rent now* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Get AccessAbstract
Comparing technical notions of communication and computation leads to a surprising result, these notions are often not conceptually distinguishable. This paper will show how the two notions may fail to be clearly distinguished from each other. The most famous models of computation and communication, Turing Machines and (Shannonstyle) information sources, are considered. The most significant difference lies in the types of statetransitions allowed in each sort of model. This difference does not correspond to the difference that would be expected after considering the ordinary usage of these terms. However, the natural usage of these terms are surprisingly difficult to distinguish from each other. The two notions may be kept distinct if computation is limited to actions within a system and communications is an interaction between a system and its environment. Unfortunately, this decision requires giving up much of the nuance associated with natural language versions of these important terms.
 Abelson, H., Sussman, G. and Sussman, J. (1996), Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, Second Edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
 Boolos, G. and Jeffrey, R. (1980), Computability and Logic, Second Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Bruce, S. (1996), Applied Crytography, New York: Wiley.
 Carnap, R. and BarHillel, Y. (1964), ‘An Outline of Semantic Information’, in Language and Information, Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, pp. 221–274.
 Cartwright, N. (1981), ‘The Reality of Causes in a World of Instrumental Laws’, PSA 2, pp. 38–48.
 Cartwright, N. (1999), ‘Causal Diversity and the Markov Condition’, Synthese 121, pp. 3–27.
 Chalmers, D. (1996), ‘Does A Rock Inplement Every FiniteState Automation?’ Synthese 108, pp. 309–333.
 Curry, H. (1977), Foundations of Mathematical Logic, Dover.
 Fetzer, J. (1994), ‘Mental Algorithms Are Minds Computational Systems?’ Pragmatics & Cognition 2(2), pp. 1–29.
 Floridi, L. (2001), ‘What Is the Philosophy of Information?’ Metaphilosophy 33(1/2), pp. 123–45. Also available at http://www.wolfson.ox.ac.uk/~floridi/index.html
 Haugeland, J. (1998), ‘Analog and Analog’, in Having Thought: Essays in the Metaphysics of Mind, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 Hopcroft, J., Motwani, R. and Ullman, J. (2001), Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and computation, Second Edition, Boston, MA: AddisonWesley.
 Isaacson, E. and Madsen, R. (1976) Markov Chains: Theoory and Application, John Wiley & Sons.
 Kleene, S. (1964), ‘General Recursive Functions of Natural Numbers’, in M. Davis, ed., The Undecidable, New York: Raven Press, pp. 237–252.
 Knuth, D. (1997), The Art of Computer Programming, 3rd Editon, Volume 1, Reading MA: AddisonWesley.
 Putnam, H. (1988), Representation and Reality, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
 Salmon, W. (1998), ‘Probablistic Causation’, in Causality and Explanation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 208–232.
 Searle, J. (1980), ‘Minds, Brains and Programs’, Behavorial and Brain Sciences 3, pp. 417–457.
 Shannon, C. and Weaver, W. (1949), The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.
 Turing, A. (1945), ‘Proposals for Development in the Mathematics Department of an Automatic Computing Engine’, in Mechanical Intelligence, Amsterdam: North Holland.
 Winograd, T., and Flores, F. (1986), Understanding Computers and Cognition, Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
 Title
 On Communication and Computation
 Journal

Minds and Machines
Volume 14, Issue 1 , pp 119
 Cover Date
 20040201
 DOI
 10.1023/B:MIND.0000005133.87521.5c
 Print ISSN
 09246495
 Online ISSN
 15728641
 Publisher
 Kluwer Academic Publishers
 Additional Links
 Topics
 Industry Sectors
 Authors

 Paul Bohan Broderick ^{(1)}
 Author Affiliations

 1. Department of Philosophy, Kent State University, 320 Bowman Hall, Kent, OH, 44240, USA