version 2017-01-09

NOTE: THIS VERSION OF THE SYLLABUS IS TENTATIVE AND WILL NOT BE FINALIZED UNTIL THE END OF THE FIRST WEEK OF CLASSES

COGS Q540 Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science

Spring 2017 Schedule and Syllabus
Meeting time: TR 1:00-2:15; Cedar Hall (AC) 116

Instructor

(Prof.) Colin Allen <colallen@indiana.edu>
Offices: Eigenmann 804 and Ballantine 654
Office hours: Tues 2:15-3:15 in Eigenmann 804, and by appointment

Course Description

The cognitive sciences began with great enthusiasm for the prospects of a successful multi-disciplinary attack on the mind. This enthusiasm was fueled by the faith that computational ideas could put flesh on abstract notions of mental representation, providing the means to make good physical sense of questions about the nature of mental information processing. The challenges of understanding how minds work have turned out to be much greater than many of the early enthusiasts predicted — in fact they have turned out to be so great that many (especially here at IU) have argued that we need new paradigms to replace the standard computationalist-representationalist assumptions of traditional cognitive science. This course aims to provide an understanding of the philosophical issues underlying this discussion and to apply this understanding to a specific cutting edge topic. For Spring 2017 that issue will be the question of how to think about the relationship of minds to brains: can mind be realized in multiple, genuinely different ways?

Texts

1. Readings provided electronically; see schedule below
2. Required book: Polger and Shapiro 2016 The Multiple Realization Book Oxford University Press [Amazon link]
3. Optional/recommended text book: Andy Clark Mindware 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press.
   Relevant chapters to assigned readings are listed as Clark # on the schedule below.
   [Amazon link]

Course Objectives

By the end of this course you should have broad knowledge of the history, philosophy, and major concepts and programmatic trends in the philosophy of cognitive science, along with an appreciation for the philosophical issues that motivated the emergence of cognitive science and underlie the controversies within it. By the end of the course you should have the ability to read works written for professional academic cognitive scientists and philosophers of cognitive science, and to summarize them accurately both orally and in writing using your own words. You should also be able to relate foundational issues in cognitive science to your own research interests.

Grading Basis

Grades will be based holistically on overall performance in the following six categories:

1. Reaction pieces 1-9 due most Thursdays, beginning January 12 [max. 400 words]*
2. Reaction piece 10 in form of book review [max. 1000 words]* of Polger & Shapiro book, due April 14.
3. Paper proposals considered Mar 9-23** [2 pages]
4. Draft of paper due any time until Apr 20 [approx 10 pages]
5. Final paper due May 03 [approx 15 pages]
6. Classroom participation***

* Weekly reaction pieces due before midnight on due dates (see calendar below). Electronic delivery preferred (all common formats can be handled), but paper delivery in class on Wednesday also acceptable. For Reactions 1-9, identify which items you have read from the reading list for that week, and write a short (250-400 word) reaction to at least one of them. This should not be a summary or restatement of the reading. Rather, write an argumentative response to something you read. State what you liked or disliked most about the idea(s) and why, with special attention to the strength of the arguments that were presented. For Reaction10, identify a journal in philosophy, cognitive science, or your primary field that does book reviews and write a short (1000-1200 word) review of Polger & Shapiro's book in the style of that journal, highlighting the aspects of the book most relevant to researchers in that area.

** Three approaches to writing a paper for this class:

1. Write a standard piece of critical philosophy — i.e., describe an argument from an assigned reading for the course, and criticize it by pointing out where it depends on assumptions that one shouldn’t believe, or fails to live up to a standard of logical reasoning.
2. Write survey of positions concerning one of the foundational issues we have encountered in the course… for example, concerning all the ideas about what concepts are or are not, cover the arguments that have been give pro and con and assess their relative strengths and weaknesses, even if you don’t yourself come down on any particular side.
3. Describe a way that a foundational issue that we have covered in the course affects theorizing, or could provide ideas for experimental design or model construction, in some area of cognitive science that interests you, especially one that is close to your own research.

*** This is a discussion-oriented class. I reserve the right to schedule individual presentations to the class if the discussion is not flowing well in class (it usually does!). Also, if you do not speak up regularly during class discussions, you may be required to take an oral exam to be scheduled at the instructor's discretion during finals week.

Schedule of Readings and Presentations

Articles for the first part of the semester are available to you via the links below for your personal use under fair use doctrine. Items preceded with bullets "•" are required readings; items preceded with daggers "†" are suggested optional readings. P&S#: indicates chapters from the book by Polger and Shapiro. This schedule may be altered in response to events in class.

NOTE: SOMETIMES LINKS BREAK. IF SOMETHING CAN'T BE REACHED, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.