Action-oriented representation

Cognition and the Brain: The Philosophy and Neuroscience Movement

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 284-306

  Mandik, Pete ^a  

^a WILLIAM PATERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 50249133377     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511610608.009     Document Type: Chapter

References (54)

1. Austin, J. (1964). Sense and Sensibilia. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bach-Y-Rita, P. (1972). Brain Mechanisms in Sensory Substitution. New YOrk and London: Academic Press.
3. Baum, D. (2002). The Definitive Guide to LEGO MINDSTORMS, Second Edition. Berkeley, CA: Apress.
4. Churchland, P. S., Ramachandran, V. S., and Sejnowski, T. J. (1994). “A critique of pure vision.” In C. Koch and J. L. Davis (eds.), Large-Scale Neuronal Theories of the Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 23–60.
5. Clark, A. (1997). Being There. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Clark, A. (2000a). “A case where access implies qualia?” Analysis 60: 1: 30–37.
7. Clark, A. (2000b). “Phenomenal immediacy and the doors of sensation.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 7 (4): 21–24.
8. Clark, A. (2002). “Visual experience and motor action: Are the bonds too tight?” Philosophical Review 110: 495–520.
9. Colby, C. (1999). “Parietal cortex constructs action-oriented spatial representations.” In N. Burgess, K. J. Jeffery, and J. O’Keefe (eds.), The Hippocampal and Parietal Foundations of Spatial Cognition. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 104–126.
10. Cotterill, R. (1998). Enchanted Looms: Conscious Networks in Brains and Computers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Dretske, F. (1995). Naturalizing the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Evans, G. (1985). “Molyneux’s question.” In Gareth Evans, The Collected Papers of Gareth Evans. London: Oxford University Press.
13. Faillenot, I., Toni, I., Decety, J., Gregoire, M. C., and Jeannerod, M. (1997). “Visual pathways for object-oriented action and object identification: Functional anatomy with PET.” Cerebral Cortex 7: 77–85.
14. Fodor, J. (1987). Psychosemantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Gallese, V., Craighero, Laila, Fadiga, Luciano, and Fogassi, Leonardo (1999). “Perception through action.” Psyche 5 (21): http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v5/psyche-5-21-gallese.html.
16. Gibson, J. (1966). The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
17. Gibson, J. (1986). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Gould, S. (1991). “Exaptation: A crucial tool for evolutionary psychology. Journal of Social Issues 47: 43–65.
19. Grice, H. (1961). “The causal theory of perception.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, sup. vol. 35: 121–152.
20. Grush, R. (1998). “Skill and spatial content.” Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy 6: http://ejap.louisiana.edu/EJAP/1998/grusharticle98.html.
21. Grush, Rick (2001). “Self, world and space: On the meaning and mechanisms of egocentric and allocentric spatial representation.” Brain and Mind 1 (1): 59–92.
22. Hanneton S., Gapenne, O., Genouel, C., Lenay, C., and Marque C. (1999). “Dynamics of shape recognition through a minimal visuo-tactile sensory substitution interface.” Third International Conference on Cognitive and Neural Systems, pp. 26–29.
23. Helmholtz, H. (1867). Handbuch der Physiologischen Optih. In G. Karsten (ed.), Allgemeine Encyklopädie derPhysik, vol. 9. Leipzig: Voss.
24. Hubel, D. H., and Wiesel, T. N. (1962). “Receptive fields, binocular interaction, and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex.” Journal of Physiology 195: 215–243.
25. Hurley, S. (1998). Consciousness in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Hyman, J. (1992). “The causal theory of perception.” Philosophical Quarterly 42 (168): 277–296.
27. Jarvilehto, T. (1998). “Efferent influences on receptors in knowledge formation.” Psycoloquy 9 (41): http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsyP9.41.
28. Jeannerod, M. (1999). “A dichotomous visual brain?” Psyche 5 (25): http: //psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v5/psyche-5-25-jeannerod.html.
29. Keeley, B. (2002). “Making sense of the senses: Individuating modalities in humans and other animals.” Journal of Philosophy 99: 5–28.
30. Koshland, D. (1977). “A response regulator model in a simple sensory system. Science 196: 1055–1063.
31. Koshland, D. (1980). “Bacterial chemotaxis in relation to neurobiology.” In W. C. Cowan et al. (eds.), Annual Review of Neurosciences 3. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews, pp. 43–75.
32. Kosslyn, S., Ganis, G., and Thompson, W. (2001). “Neural foundations of imagery.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2: 635–642.
33. Larsson J., Amunts, K., Gulyas, B., Malikovic, A., Zilles, K., and Roland, P. (1999). “Neuronal correlates of real and illusory contour perception: Functional anatomy with PET.” EurJNeurosci. 11 (11): 4024–4036.
34. Lenay, C., Cannu, S., and Villon, P. (1997). “Technology and perception: The contribution of sensory substitution systems.” In Second International Conference on Cognitive Technology. Aizu, Japan, and Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE, pp. 44–53.
35. Livingstone, M., and Hubel, D. (1988). “Segregation of form, color, movement anddepth: Anatomy, physiology and perception.” Science 240 (4853): 740–749.
36. Mach, E. (1885). Die Analyse der Empfindungen. Jena: Fischer.
37. Mandik, P. (1999). “Qualia, space, and control.” Philosophical Psychology 12 (1): 47–60.
38. Mandik, P. (2001). “Mental representation and the subjectivity of consciousness.” Philosophical Psychology 14 (2): 179–202.
39. Mandik, P. (2002). “Synthetic neuroethology.” In T. W. Bynum and J. H. Moor (eds.), CyberPhilosophy: The Intersection of Philosophy and Computing. New York: Blackwell, 2003, pp. 8–25.
40. Mandik, P. (2003). “Varieties of representation in evolved and embodied neural networks.” Biology and Philosophy 18 (1): 95–130.
41. Millikan, R. (1996). “Pushmi-pullyu representations.” In L. May, M. Friedman, and A. Clark (eds.), Minds and Morals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 145–161.
42. Milner, D., and Goodale, M. (1995). The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Oakes, R. (1978). “How to rescue the traditional causal theory of perception.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 38 (3): 370–383.
44. O’Craven, K., and Kanwisher, N. (2000). “Mental imagery of faces and places activates corresponding stimulus-specific brain regions.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12: 1013–1023.
45. O’Regan, J., and Noe, A. (2001). “A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5): 939–1011.
46. Perrett, D., Mistlin, A., andChitty, A. (1989). “Visual neurons responsive to faces.” Trends in Neurosciences 10: 358–364.
47. Peterhans, E., and von der Heydt, R. (1991). “Subjective contours - bridging the gap between psychophysics and physiology.” Trends in Neurosciences 14: 112–119.
48. Prinz, J. (2000). “The ins and outs of consciousness.” Brain and Mind 1 (2): 245–256.
49. Prinz, J. (2001). “Functionalism, dualism, and the neural correlates of consciousness.” In W. Bechtel, P. Mandik, J. Mundale, and R. Stufflebeam (eds.), Philosophy and the Neurosciences: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.
50. Rosenthal, D. (1997). “A theory of consciousness.” In Ned Block, O. Flanagan, and G. Guzeldere (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51. Stevens, J., Emerson, R., Gerstein, G., Kallos, T., Neufield, G., Nichols, C., and Rosenquist, A. (1976). “Paralysis of the awake human: Visual perceptions.” Vision Research 16: 93–98.
52. Sullins, J. (2002). “Building simple mechanical minds: Using LEGO® robots for research and teaching in philosophy.” In T. W. Bynum and J. H. Moor (eds.), CyberPhilosophy: The Intersection of Philosophy and Computing. New York: Blackwell, 2003, pp. 104–116.
53. Tye, M. (1995). Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. von der Heydt, R., Peterhans, E., and Baumgartner, G. (1984). “Illusory contours and cortical neuron responses.” Science 224: 1260–1262.