Advertisement

Cognitive Processing

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 115–131 | Cite as

The symbol detachment problem

  • Giovanni Pezzulo
  • Cristiano Castelfranchi
Research Report

Abstract

In situated and embodied approaches it is commonly assumed that the dynamics of sensorimotor engagement between an adaptive agent and its environment are crucial in understanding natural cognition. This perspective permits to address the symbol grounding problem, since the aboutness of any mental state arising during agent-environment engagement is guaranteed by their continuous coupling. However, cognitive agents are also able to formulate representations that are detached from the current state of affairs, such as expectations and goals. Moreover, they can act on their representations before—or instead of—acting directly on the environment, for example building the plan of a bridge and not directly the bridge. On the basis of representations, actions such as planning, remembering or imagining are possible that are disengaged from the current sensorimotor cycle, and often functional to future-oriented conducts. A new problem thus has to be acknowledged, the symbol detachment problem: how and why do situated agents develop representations that are detached from their current sensorimotor interaction, but nevertheless preserve grounding and aboutness? How do cognitive agents progressively acquire a range of capabilities permitting them to deal not only with the current situation but also with alternative, in particular future states of affairs? How do they develop the capability of acting on their representations instead of acting directly on the world? In a theoretical and developmental perspective, we propose that anticipation plays a crucial role in the detachment process: anticipatory representations, originally detached from the sensorimotor cycle for the sake of action control, are successively exapted for bootstrapping increasingly complex cognitive capabilities.

Keywords

Anticipation Detachment Disengagement Symbol Representation Autonomy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the EU-funded project MindRACES: from Reactive to Anticipatory Cognitive Embodied Systems (FP6-511931). Thanks to Joachim Hoffmann for insightful discussions.

References

  1. Adams JA (1971) A closed-loop theory of motor learning. J Mot Behav 3:111–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aquinas ST (1947) The Summa Theologica. Benziger BrosGoogle Scholar
  3. Balkenius C, Hulth N (1999) Attention as selection-for-action: a scheme for active perception. In: Proceedings of EuRobot-1999, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  4. Barsalou LW (1983) Ad hoc categories. Mem Cognit 11(3):211–227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Barsalou LW (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behav Brain Sci 22:577–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barsalou LW (2003) Abstraction in perceptual symbol systems. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 358(1435):1177–1187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bickhard MH (2001) Function, anticipation and representation. In: Dubois DM (ed) Computing anticipatory systems. CASYS 2000-Fourth international conference. American Institute of Physics, Melville, pp 459–469Google Scholar
  8. Blakemore S-J, Decety J (2001) From the perception of action to the understanding of intention. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:561–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brentano F (1985) Psychology from an empirical standpoint. Translated by Rancurello AC, Terrell DB, McAlister LL Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Brooks RA (1991) Intelligence without representation. Artif Intell 47(47):139–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butz MV, Hoffmann J (2002) Anticipations control behavior: animal behavior in an anticipatory learning classifier system. Adapt Behav 10(2):75–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castelfranchi C (1995) Guarantees for autonomy in cognitive agent architecture. In: Wooldridge M, Jennings NR (eds) Intelligent agents: theories, architectures, and languages. number 890 in LNAI, Springer, pp 56–70Google Scholar
  13. Castelfranchi C (2005) Mind as an anticipatory device: for a theory of expectations. In: BVAI 2005, pp 258–276Google Scholar
  14. Castelfranchi C, Paglieri F (2007) The role of beliefs in goal dynamics: prolegomena to a constructive theory of intentions. Synthese, to appearGoogle Scholar
  15. Clark A (1997) Being there. Putting brain, body, and world together. MIT Press, Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark A, Chalmers DJ (1998) The extended mind. Analysis 58:10–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark A, Grush R (1999) Towards a cognitive robotics. Adapt Behav 7(1):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Colombo M, Graziano M (1994) Effects of auditory and visual interference on auditory-visual delayed matching to sample in monkeys (maca fascicularis). Behav Neurosci 108:636–639PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Damasio AR (1989) Time-locked multiregional retroactivation: a systems-level proposal for the neural substrates of recall and recognition. Cognition 33:25–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Damasio AR (1994) Descartes’ error: emotion, reason and the human brain. Grosset/Putnam, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Decety J (1996) Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate? Brain Res Cogn 3:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Decety J, Chaminade T (2003) When the self represents the other: a new cognitive neuroscience view on psychological identification. Conscious Cogn 12(20):577–596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dennett DC (1991) Consciousness explained. Little Brown & Co. Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. Desmurget M, Grafton S (2000) Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends Cogn Sci 4:423–431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Doya K (2002) Metalearning and neuromodulation. Neural Netw 15(4–6):495–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Drescher GL (1991) Made-up minds: a constructivist approach to artificial intelligence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Fogassi L, Ferrari P, Chersi F, Gesierich B, Rozzi S, Rizzolatti G (2005) Parietal lobe: from action organization to intention understanding. Science 308:662–667PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Frith CD, Blakemore S, Wolpert DM (2000) Explaining the symptoms of schizophrenia: abnormalities in the awareness of action. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 31(2–3):357–363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gallese V (2000) The inner sense of action: agency and motor representations. J Conscious Stud 7:23–40Google Scholar
  30. Gallese V (2001) The ’shared manifold’ hypothesis. from mirror neurons to empathy. J Conscious Stud 8:5–87Google Scholar
  31. Gallese V, Goldman A (1998) Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends Cogn Sci 2(12):493–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gallese V, Lakoff G (2005) The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in reason and language. Cogn Neuropsychol 22:455–479Google Scholar
  33. Gallese V, Metzinger T (2003) Motor ontology: the representational reality of goals, actions, and selves. Philos Psychol 13(3):365–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gardenfors P (2004) Cooperation and the evolution of symbolic communication. In: Oller K, Griebel U (eds) Evolution of communication systems: a comparative approach. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 237–256Google Scholar
  35. Gardenfors P, Orvath M (2005) The evolution of anticipatory cognition as a precursor to symbolic communication. In: Brook S (eds) In: Proceedings of the Morris symposium on the evolution of language. NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. Gibson J (1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  37. Glenberg A (1997) What memory is for. Behav Brain Sci 20:1–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Grush R (2004) The emulation theory of representation: motor control, imagery, and perception. Behav Brain Sci 27(3):377–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Harnad S (1990) The symbol grounding problem. Physica D 42:335–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hesslow G (2002) Conscious thought as simulation of behaviour and perception. Trends Cogn Sci 6:242–247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hoffmann J (2003) Anticipatory behavioral control. In: Butz M, et al. (eds) Anticipatory behavior in adaptive learning systems: foundations, theories, and systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 44–65Google Scholar
  42. Hoffmann H (2007) Perception through visuomotor anticipation in a mobile robot. Neural Netw 20:22–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. von Holst E, Mittelstaedt H (1950) Das reafferenzprinzip. Naturwissenschaften 37:464–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hommel B, Musseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W (2001) The theory of event coding (tec): a framework for perception and action planning. Behav Brain Sci 24(5):849–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hurley SL (2005) Active perception and perceiving action: the shared circuits hypothesis. In: Gendler T, Hawthorne J (eds) Perceptual experience. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  46. Iacoboni M (2003) Understanding others: Imitation, language, empathy. In: Hurley S, Chater N (eds) Perspectives on imitation: from cognitive neuroscience to social science. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. James W (1890) The principles of psychology. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Jeannerod M (1994) The representing brain: neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behav Brain Sci 17:187–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jeannerod M (2001) Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. NeuroImage 14:S103–S109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kant I (1781/1998) Critique of pure reason. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Kawato M (1999) Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning. Curr Opin Neurobiol 9:718–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kosslyn SM, Sussman A (1994) Roles of imagery in perception: or, there is no such thing as immaculate perception. In: Gazzaniga M (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1035–1042Google Scholar
  53. Kunde W, Koch I, Hoffmann J (2004) Anticipated action effects affect the selection, initiation and execution of actions. Q J Exp Psychol A 57(1):87–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lakoff G (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  55. Mahon B, Caramazza A (2005) The orchestration of the sensory-motor systems: clues from neuropsychology. Cogn Neuropsychol 22:480–494Google Scholar
  56. Mehta B, Schaal S (2002) Forward models in visuomotor control. J Neurophysiol 88:942–953PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Miall RC, Wolpert DM (1996) Forward models for physiological motor control. Neural Netw 9(8):1265–1279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Middleton FA, Strick PL (2000) Basal ganglia output and cognition: evidence from anatomical, behavioral, and clinical studies. Brain Cogn 42(2):183–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. O’Regan J, Noe A (2001) A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behav Brain Sci 24(5):883–917Google Scholar
  60. Pezzulo G, Calvi G (2006a) A schema based model of the praying mantis. In: Nolfi S, et al (eds) From animals to animats 9, Proceedings of the ninth international conference on simulation of adaptive behaviour. vol LNAI 4095. Springer, Berlin, pp 211–223Google Scholar
  61. Pezzulo G, Calvi G (2006b) Toward a perceptual symbol system. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on epigenetic robotics: modeling cognitive development in robotic systems. Lund University Cognitive Science Studies 118Google Scholar
  62. Pezzulo G, Baldassarre G, Butz MV, Castelfranchi C, Hoffmann J (2006) An analysis of the ideomotor principle and tote. In: Butz M, et al (eds) Proceedings of the third workshop on anticipatory behavior in adaptive learning systems (ABiALS 2006)Google Scholar
  63. Piaget J (1954) The construction of reality in the child. BallentineGoogle Scholar
  64. Popper KR (1996) Alles Leben ist Problemlösen. Über Erkenntnis, Geschichte und Politik. R. Piper-Verlag, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  65. Rizzolatti G, Arbib MA (1998) Language within our grasp. Trends Neurosci 21(5):188–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rizzolatti G, Fogassi L, Gallese V (2001) Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:661–670PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Roitblat H (1980) Codes and coding processes in pigeon short-term memory. Anim Learn Behav 8:341–351Google Scholar
  68. Rosenblueth A, Wiener N, Bigelow J (1943) Behavior, purpose and teleology. Philos Sci 10(1):18–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Roy D (2005) Semiotic schemas: a framework for grounding language in action and perception. Artif Intell 167(1–2):170–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sloman A, Chappell J (2005) The altricial-precocial spectrum for robots. In: Proceedings of IJCAIGoogle Scholar
  71. Smith BC (1996) On the origin of objects. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  72. Taylor C (1971) What is involved in a genetic psychology? In: Mischel T (ed) Cognitive development and epistemology. Academic, New York, pp 393–416Google Scholar
  73. Tolman E (1932) Purposive behavior in animals and men. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  74. Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  75. Wolpert DM, Kawato M (1998) Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control. Neural Netw 11(7–8):1317–1329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wolpert DM, Gharamani Z, Jordan M (1995) An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 269:1179–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, CNRRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations