Cognitivist and Emergent Cognition - An Alternative Perspective

  • Michael James Gratton
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7999)


A new perspective on classifying cognitive systems is presented in which a distinction is made based on how the world is represented, rather than the typical distinction between cognitivist and emergent approaches. It is argued that the typical classification in essence distinguishes between systems by their implementation, rather than by their properties. The alternative presented here instead focuses on how the system represents the world (if at all) and whether these representations are intelligible to the designer or the system itself. From this novel angle, existing systems are better classified and importantly a gap in existing cognitive systems research becomes evident. An outline of a well-founded cognitive system that fills this space is put forward, one which cognitive robotics is ideally situated to explore.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Nilsson, N.J.: Shakey the Robot. Technical report, SRI International (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Newell, A., Simon, H.A.: Completer Science as Emprical Inquiry: Symbols and Search. Communications of the ACM 19(3), 113–126 (1976)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brooks, R.A.: A Robust Layered Control System for a Mobile Robot. IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation 2(1), 14–23 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vernon, D., Metta, G., Sandini, G.: A Survey of Artificial Cognitive Systems: Implications for the Autonomous Development of Mental Capabilities in Computational Agents. IEEE Trans. Evolutionary Computation 11(2), 151–180 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anderson, M.L.: Embodied Cognition: A Field Guide. Artificial Intelligence 149(1), 91–130 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brooks, R.A.: Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence 47(13), 139–159 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fodor, J.A., Pylyshyn, Z.W.: Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture: A Critical Analysis. Cognition 28(1-2), 3–71 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slezak, P.: The Tripartite Model of Representation. Philosophical Psychology 15(3), 239–270 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cummins, R.: Representations, Targets, and Attitudes. MIT Press (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael James Gratton
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringThe University of New South WalesAustralia

Personalised recommendations