认知科学中计算解释的自主性  

Autonomy of Computational Explanation in Cognitive Science

作　　者：高俊 Gao Jun(Department of Philosophy,East China Normal University,Shanghai 200241,China)

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学哲学系,上海200241

出　　处：《洛阳师范学院学报》2024年第3期23-28,共6页Journal of Luoyang Normal University

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目(23AZX020)。

摘　　要：计算作为一种科学方法,在解释认知现象中扮演重要角色。最近,其解释地位受到部分机制论者的质疑。他们认为计算作为一种科学解释是不完全的,可以被整合到机制解释中,因此计算解释并不具有解释自主性。然而,机制论的质疑并不成立。认知科学中计算解释存在两种形态:How形式和Why形式。机制解释对How形式计算解释自主性质疑的根源在于其混淆了计算解释与计算实现。机制解释通过描述被解释系统的因果机制来完成解释任务,属于因果解释类。机制解释试图取代Why形式计算解释失败的原因在于,很多Why形式计算解释使用类似于数学解释中的基本原理,这使其无法被整合到任何因果或基于因果的解释理论中。Computing,as a scientific method,plays an important role in explaining cognitive phenomena.Recently,the explanatory status of computing has been questioned by some mechanists.They believe that computation as a scientific explanation is incomplete and can be integrated into mechanism explanation,so computational explanation does not have explanatory autonomy.However,mechanists’challenges are invalid.There are two forms of computational explanation in cognitive science:How-form and Why-form.The root cause for the questioning in the autonomy of How-form computational interpretation lies in its confusion between computational explanation and computational implementation.Mechanism explanation completes its explanatory task by describing the causal mechanism of the explained system,and it belongs to the category of causal explanation.The reason for failure that mechanism explanation attempts to replace Why-formal calculation explanation is that many Why-form computational explanations use basic principles similar to mathematical explanations,which makes them unable to be integrated into any causal or causal-based explanation theory.

关 键 词：计算解释 自主性 机制解释 计算实现 

分 类 号：B80-0[哲学宗教—思维科学]