Synthese

, Volume 154, Issue 1, pp 97–120 | Cite as

Computationalism, The Church–Turing Thesis, and the Church–Turing Fallacy

Abstract

The Church–Turing Thesis (CTT) is often employed in arguments for computationalism. I scrutinize the most prominent of such arguments in light of recent work on CTT and argue that they are unsound. Although CTT does nothing to support computationalism, it is not irrelevant to it. By eliminating misunderstandings about the relationship between CTT and computationalism, we deepen our appreciation of computationalism as an empirical hypothesis.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Attneave, F. 1961

    ‘In Defense of Homunculi’

    Rosenblith, W. eds. Sensory CommunicationMIT PressCambridge, MA777782
    Google Scholar
  2. Barabási, A.-L. 2002Linked: The New Science of NetworksPerseusCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Baum, E.B. 2004What is Thought?MIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Blum, L., Cucker, F.,  et al. 1998Complexity and Real ComputationSpringerNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Boden, M.A. 1988Computer Models of Mind Computational Approaches in Theoretical PsychologyCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Chalmers, D.J. 1996The Conscious Mind In Search of a Fundamental TheoryOxford University PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Church, A. 1936‘An Unsolvable Problem in Elementary Number Theory’The American Journal of Mathematics58345363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Churchland, P.M., Churchland, P.S. 1990‘Could a Machine Think?’Scientific AmericanCCLXII2631Google Scholar
  9. Cleland, C.E. 1993‘Is the Church–Turing Thesis True?’Minds and Machines3283312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Copeland, B.J. 1998‘Turing’s O-machines, Searle, Penrose, and the Brain’Analysis58128138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Copeland, B.J. 2000‘Narrow Versus Wide Mechanism Including a Re-Examination of Turing’s Views on the Mind-Machine Issue’The Journal of PhilosophyXCVI532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Copeland, B. J.: 2002a, ‘The Church–Turing Thesis’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2002 Edition). E. N. Zalta, URL = 〈http://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/fall2002/entries/church–turing/〉.Google Scholar
  13. Copeland, B.J. 2002b‘Hypercomputation’Minds and Machines12461502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cotogno, P. 2003‘Hypercomputation and the Physical Church–Turing Thesis’British Journal for the Philosophy of Science54181223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dayan, P., Abbott, L.F. 2001Theoretical Neuroscience Computational and Mathematical Modeling of Neural SystemsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  16. Dennett, D.C. 1978aBrainstormsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  17. Dennett, D.C. 1978b

    ‘Introduction’

    Dennett, D.C. eds. BrainstormsMIT PressCambridge, MAxixxii
    Google Scholar
  18. Dennett, D.C. 1978c

    ‘Skinner Skinned’

    Dennett, D.C. eds. BrainstormsMIT PressCambridge, MA5370
    Google Scholar
  19. Dennett, D.C. 1978d

    ‘Artificial Intelligence as Philosophy and as Psychology’

    Dennett, D.C. eds. BrainstormsMIT PressCambridge, MA109126
    Google Scholar
  20. Fodor, J.A. 1968‘The Appeal to Tacit Knowledge in Psychological Explanation’Journal of Philosophy65627640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fodor, J.A. 1981RepresentationsMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  22. Fodor, J.A. 1998ConceptsClarendon PressOxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Folina, J. 1998‘Church’s Thesis: Prelude to a Proof’Philosophia Mathematica6302323Google Scholar
  24. Giunti, M. 1997Computation, Dynamics, and CognitionOxford University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Gödel, K. 1965

    ‘Postscriptum’

    Davis, M. eds. The UndecidableRavenNew York7173
    Google Scholar
  26. Guttenplan, S. eds. 1994A Companion to the Philosophy of MindBlackwellCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  27. Haugeland, J. 1981‘Analog and Analog’Philosophical Topics12213225Google Scholar
  28. Hughes, R.I.G. 1999

    ‘The Ising Model, Computer Simulation, and Universal Physics’

    Morgan, M.S.Morrison, M. eds. Models as MediatorsCambridge University PressCambridge97145
    Google Scholar
  29. Humphreys, P. 1990‘Computer Simulations’PSA 19902497506Google Scholar
  30. Kálmar, L. 1959

    ‘An Argument Against the Plausibility of Church’s Thesis’

    Heyting, A. eds. Constructivity in MathematicsNorth-HollandAmsterdam7280
    Google Scholar
  31. Kearns, J.T. 1997“Thinking Machines: Some Fundamental Confusions”Minds and Machines7269287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kleene, S.C. 1952Introduction to MetamathematicsPrincetonVan NostrandGoogle Scholar
  33. Machamer, P.K., Darden, L., Craver, C. 2000‘Thinking About Mechanisms’Philosophy of Science67125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McCulloch, W.S., Pitts, W.H. 1943‘A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity’Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics7115133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McGee, V. 1991‘We Turing Machines Aren’t Expected-Utility Maximizers (Even Ideally’)Philosophical Studies64115123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller, G.A., Galanter, E.H., Pribram, K. 1960Plans and the Structure of BehaviorHoltNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Nelson, R.J. 1987‘Church’s Thesis and Cognitive Science’Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic28581614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Piccinini, G. (2003a). Computations and Computers in the Sciences of Mind and Brain. Pittsburgh, PA, University of Pittsburgh. URL= < http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-08132003-155121/ > Google Scholar
  39. Piccinini, G. 2003b“Alan Turing and the Mathematical Objection”Minds and Machines132348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Piccinini, G. 2004a“The First Computational Theory of Mind and Brain: A Close Look at McCulloch and Pitts’s ‘Logical Calculus of Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity”’Synthese141175215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piccinini, G. 2004b“Functionalism, Computationalism, and Mental States”Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science35811833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pitowski, I., Shagrir, O. 2003‘Physical Hypercomputation and the Church–Turing Thesis’Minds and Machines1387101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pour-El, M.B., Richards, J.I. 1989Computability in Analysis and PhysicsSpringer VerlagBerlinGoogle Scholar
  44. Pylyshyn, Z.W. 1984Computation and CognitionMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  45. Rohrlich, F. 1990‘Computer Simulation in the Physical Sciences’PSA 19902507518Google Scholar
  46. Scott, P. D. (1997). Crisis? What Crisis? Church’s Thesis and the Scope of Cognitive Science. Two Sciences of Mind: Readings in Cognitive Science and Consciousness. S. Ó Nualláin, P. Mc Kevitt and E. Mac Aogáin. Philadelphia, John Benjamins: 63–76.Google Scholar
  47. Shanker, S.G. 1995‘Turing and the Origins of AI’Philosophia Mathematica35285Google Scholar
  48. Sieg, W. 1994

    ‘Mechanical Procedures and Mathematical Experience’

    Alexander, G. eds. Mathematics and Mind.Oxford University PressNew York71117
    Google Scholar
  49. Sieg, W.: 2001, ‘Calculations by Man and Machine: Conceptual Analysis’, in W. Sieg, R. Sommer and C. Talcott (eds.), Reflections on the Foundations of Mathematics (Essays in Honor of Solomon Feferman), Association for Symbolic Logic, vol. 15, pp. 387–406.Google Scholar
  50. Siegelmann, H.T. 1999Neural Networks and Analog Computation: Beyond the Turing LimitBirkhäuserBoston, MAGoogle Scholar
  51. Searle, J.R. 1992The Rediscovery of the MindMIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  52. Strogatz, S.H. 1994Nonlinear Dynamics and ChaosPerseusCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  53. Strogatz, S.H. 2003Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous OrderHyperionNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Tamburrini, G.: 1997, ‘Mechanistic Theories in Cognitive Science: The Import of Turing’s Thesis’, in M. L. Dalla Chiara and et al. (eds.), Logic and Scientific Method, Kluwer, pp. 239–257.Google Scholar
  55. Turing, A. M.: 1936–7 [1965], ‘On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem’, in M. Davis. (ed.), The Undecidable, Raven, Ewlett.Google Scholar
  56. Turing, A. M.: 1948, ‘Intelligent Machinery’, in D. Ince (ed.), Mechanical Intelligence, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 87–106.Google Scholar
  57. Neumann, J. 1951

    ‘The General and Logical Theory of Automata’

    Jeffress, L.A. eds. Cerebral Mechanisms in BehaviorWileyNew York141
    Google Scholar
  58. Webb, J.C. 1980Mechanism, Mentalism, and MetamathematicsReidelDordrechtGoogle Scholar
  59. Wolfram, S. 2002A New Kind of ScienceWolfram MediaChampaign, ILGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Missouri – St. LouisSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations