Skip to main content
Log in

Skill theory v2.0: dispositions, emulation, and spatial perception

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An attempt is made to defend a general approach to the spatial content of perception, an approach according to which perception is imbued with spatial content in virtue of certain kinds of connections between perceiving organism’s sensory input and its behavioral output. The most important aspect of the defense involves clearly distinguishing two kinds of perceptuo-behavioral skills—the formation of dispositions, and a capacity for emulation. The former, the formation of dispositions, is argued to by the central pivot of spatial content. I provide a neural information processing interpretation of what these dispositions amount to, and describe how dispositions, so understood, are an obvious implementation of Gareth Evans’ proposal on the topic. Furthermore, I describe what sorts of contribution are made by emulation mechanisms, and I also describe exactly how the emulation framework differs from similar but distinct notions with which it is often unhelpfully confused, such as sensorimotor contingencies and forward models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitken S., Bower T.G.R. (1982). The use of the sonicguide in infancy. Visual Impairment and Blindness 76: 91–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkeley, G. (1948). An essay towards a new theory of vision. In A. A. Luce, & T. E. Jessop (Eds.), The works of George Berkeley, Bishop of clyone, Vol. 1. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd.

  • Bower T.G.R. (1977). Blind babies see with their ears. New Scientist 73: 255–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson A.E. Jr., Ho Y.C. (1969). Applied optimal control: Optimization, estimation, and control. Waltham, MA, Blaisdell

    Google Scholar 

  • Buneo C.A., Andersen R.A. (2006). The posterior parietal cortex: Sensorimotor interface for the planning and online control of visually guided movements. Neuropsychologia 44: 2594–2606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark A. (2006). Cognitive complexity and the sensorimotor frontier. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplemental Volume 80(1): 43–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cussins A. (1992). Content, embodiment and objectivity: The theory of cognitive trails. Mind 101(404): 651–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmurget M., Grafton S. (2000). Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(11): 423–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duhamel, J.-R., Colby, C., & Goldberg, M. E. (1992). The updating of the representation of visual space in parietal cortex by intended eye movements. Science, 255(5040), 90–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasmith, C., & Anderson, C. (2003). Neural engineering: Computational, representation, and dynamics in neurobiological systems. MIT Press.

  • Evans, G. (1985). Molyneux’s question. In G. Evans (Ed.), The collected papers of Gareth Evans. London: Oxford University Press.

  • Grush, R. (1995). Emulation and cognition. PhD Dissertation, UC San Diego Cognitive Science and Philosophy, UMI.

  • Grush, R. (1997). The architecture of representation. Philosophical Psychology, 10(1), 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grush, R. (1998). Skill and spatial content. Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy, 6(6). (http://www.ejap.louisiana.edu/EJAP/1998/grusharticle98.html)

  • Grush R. (2000). Self, world and space: the meaning and mechanisms of ego- and allocentric spatial representation. Brain and Mind 1(1): 59–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grush R. (2004a). The emulation theory of representation: motor control, imagery, and perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27(3): 377–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grush R. (2004b). Author’s response: Further explorations of the empirical and theoretical aspects of emulation theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27(3): 425–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grush R. (2005). Internal models and the construction of time: Generalizing from state estimation to trajectory estimation to address temporal features of perception, including temporal illusions. Journal of Neural Engineering 2(3): S209–S218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grush R. (2007a). Berkeley and the spatiality of vision. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45(3): 413–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grush, R. (2007b). Space, time and objects. In J. Bickel (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy and neuroscience. Oxford University Press.

  • Heil J. (1987). The Molyneux question. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 17: 227–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ito M. (1970). Neurophysiological aspects of the cerebellar motor control system. International Journal of Neurology 7: 162–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalman R.E. (1960). A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. Journal of Basic Engineering 82(d): 35–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalman R., Bucy R.S. (1961). New results in linear filtering and prediction theory. Journal of Basic Engineering 83(d): 95–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawato M. (1999). Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 9, 718–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. (1994). A 3D state space formulation of a navigation Kalman filter for autonomous vehicles. Techinical Report, CMU-RI-TR-94–19, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.

  • Mel, B. W. (1986). A connectionist learning model for 3-d mental rotation, zoom, and pan. In Proceedings of Eighth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 562–571.

  • Mel, B. W. (1988). MURPHY: A robot that learns by doing. In Neural information processing systems (pp. 544–553). New York: American Institute of Physics.

  • Noë A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Noë, A. (2006). Précis of action in perception. Electronic Journal, 12(1).

  • Pouget A., Sejnowski T. (1997). Spatial transformations in the parietal cortex using basis functions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 9(2): 222–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouget A., Deneve S., Duhamel J.-R. (2002). A computational perspective on the neural basis of multisensory spatial representation. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience 3: 741–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao R.P.N. (1999). An optimal estimation approach to visual perception and learning. Vision Research 39: 1963–1989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: the state of the art. Cognition, 80, 1–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertheimer M. (1912). Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 61: 161–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolpert D.M., Ghahramani Z., Randall Flanagan J. (2001). Perspectives and problems in motor learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5(11): 487–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zipser D., Andersen R.A. (1988). A back-propagation programmed network that simulates response properties of a subset of posterior parietal neurons. Nature 331(6158): 679–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rick Grush.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grush, R. Skill theory v2.0: dispositions, emulation, and spatial perception. Synthese 159, 389–416 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9236-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9236-z

Keywords

Navigation