Minds and Machines

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 430–435 | Cite as

Andy Clark, Jesús Ezquerro, and Jesús M. Larrazabal (eds.), Philosophy and Cognitive Science: Catergories, Consciousness, and Reasoning

  • Bipin Indurkhya


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barwise, J. and Perry, J. (1981), ‘Semantic innocence and uncompromising situations’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy VI, pp. 387–403.Google Scholar
  2. Brooks, R. (1987), ‘Planning is just a way of avoiding figuring out what to do next’, MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Working Paper 103.Google Scholar
  3. Burge, T. (l986), ‘Individualism and psychology’, Philosophical Review 95, pp. 3–45.Google Scholar
  4. Davies, M. (1992), ‘Perceptual content and local supervenience’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 92, pp. 21–45.Google Scholar
  5. Dinsmore, J. (1991), Partitioned representations, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Fauconnier, G. (1985), Mental spaces, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Lakoff, G. (1987), Women, fire and dangerous things, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gärdenfors, P. (1996), ‘Mental representations, conceptual spaces and metaphors’, Synthese 106, pp. 21–47.Google Scholar
  9. Martins, J.P. and Shapiro, S.C. (1988), ‘A model for belief revision’, Artificial Intelligence 35, pp. 25–79.Google Scholar
  10. McGinn, C. (1989), Mental Content, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Mozer, M. and Smolensky, P. (1989), ‘Using relevance to reduce network size automatically’, Connection Science 1, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  12. Olson, K. (1987), An essay on facts. Stanford: CSLI/Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Putnam, H. (1975), Mind, language and reality: Philosophical papers, Vol. 2, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  14. Putnam, H. (1981), Reason, truth and history, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1973), ‘What the mind's eye tells the mind's brain’, Psychological Bulletin 80, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
  16. Shapiro, S.C. and Rapaport, W.J. (1987), ‘SnePS considered as a fully intensional propositional semantic network’, in N. Cercone and G. McCalla (eds.) The knowledge frontier: Essays in the representation of knowledge, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 262–315.Google Scholar
  17. Shapiro, S.C. and Rapaport, W.J. (1991), ‘Models and Minds: Knowledge representation for natural-language competence’, in R. Cummins and J. Pollock (eds.) Philosophy and AI: Essays at the interface, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 215–259.Google Scholar
  18. Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J. (1994), ‘Spatial inclusion as an analogy for set membership: a case study of analogy at work’, in K. Holyoak and J. Barnden (eds.) Analogical Connections, Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, pp. 446–486.Google Scholar
  19. Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J. (1995), ‘A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: logic and implementation’, Cognitive Science 19, pp. 97–140.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bipin Indurkhya
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer, Information and Communication %SciencesTokyo University of Agriculture and TechnologyTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations