Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture

Book Overview

What is the nature of human thought? A long dominant view holds that the mind is a general problem-solving device that approaches all questions in much the same way. Chomsky's theory of language,... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0521419662
• ISBN13: 9780521419666
• Release Date: May 1994
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press
• Length: 530 Pages
• Weight: 1.95 lbs.
• Dimensions: 9.8" x 1.3" x 6.5"

Customer Reviews

Excellent introduction to central topic in modern cog sci

While certainly putting forth a controversial view of cognition, this book includes contributions by many of the scientists in the forefront of the field, and provides a broad overview of thinking in this area. Great for students as well as experts in the field.

Needs more scientific support but a helpful book

Is the human brain an entity that makes use of a general collection of reasoning processes that can be used to solve problems no matter what domain or context these problems appear? Or does the human brain make use of cognitive processes that work only in specific domains? The latter alternative is called `domain specificity' and is held to be the correct one throughout this book. The articles in the book argue for the hypothesis of domain specificity mostly from a philosophical point of view, and not a scientific one. The articles though do grant a large degree of insight into the current thinking on domain specificity. Via measurements and laboratory experiments, current research in neuroscience is beginning to shed more light on whether the brain is an "all-purpose" problem solver or a collection of independent modules geared toward specific tasks. All of the articles in the book are interesting, but only a few will be reviewed here due to reasons of space. The first article of the book, entitled "Toward a topography of mind: An introduction to domain specificity," introduces the problem of domain specificity and how it arose historically. It is very tricky to define what a domain actually is, but the authors of this article take it up in some detail. They emphasize the Chomsky theory of natural language grammar as being one of the first most important examples of a domain-specific perspective. If the mind is modular, as Chomsky and the authors in this book assert, then damage to one module should not affect the cognitive abilities of another module. There are indications from experimental neuroscience that this is the case for abilities such as language, music, and mathematics for example. The authors mention some of this evidence in this article. Interestingly though, they believe that theories are domain specific. They argue for example, that a theory of biology cannot be applied to physics. However this is only partly true. For example, molecular biology can be interpreted completely in terms of physics. There are many other examples of theories designed for specific domains that work in others. In addition, the authors assert that theory construction is not necessary for "getting around the world." This may be true in a certain weak sense, but finding a cure for cancer or "getting around" or traveling to other worlds requires highly sophisticated theories. The authors do however distinguish between `scientific' theories and commonsense or `folk' theories, the latter of which are needed in everyday life. They discuss some examples in the article that emphasize their assertion that "theoretical" beliefs are important in organizing input data. The authors also address the question of what a domain really is, noting at the same time that an explicit definition does not exist. They therefore rely on examples of domains, and characterize it as a body of knowledge that serves to identify and interpret phenomena sharing certain properties.