SIT Versus Connectionism and Dynamic Systems Theory
On the one hand, a representational theory like SIT seems opposite to dynamic systems theory (DST). On the other hand, connectionism can be seen as something in between, that is, it flirts with DST when it comes to the usage of differential equations and it flirts with theories like SIT when it comes to the representation of information. In fact, the analyses provided by SIT, connectionism, and DST, correspond to what Marr called the computational, the algorithmic, and the implementational levels of description, respectively. According to Marr, such analyses are complementary rather than opposite.
What SIT, connectionism, and DST have in common is that they describe nonlinear system behavior, that is, a minor change in the input may yield a major change in the output. Their complementarity expresses itself in that they focus on different aspects:
- First, DST focuses primarily on how the state of a physical system as a whole (in this case, the brain) develops over time, whereas both SIT and connectionism focus primarily on what a system does in terms of information processing (which, in this case, can be said to constitute cognition).
- Second, according to both SIT and connectionism, this information processing relies on interactions between pieces of information in distributed representations, that is, in networks of connected pieces of information. In this respect, however, connectionism focuses on concrete interaction mechanisms (i.c., activation spreading) in a prefixed network that is assumed to be suited for any input, whereas SIT focuses on the nature of the outcome of the interactions which are assumed to take place in transient, input-dependent, networks.
Read more about this topic: Structural Information Theory
Famous quotes containing the words sit, dynamic, systems and/or theory:
“When we know our own strength, we shall the better know what to undertake with hopes of success; and when we have well surveyed the powers of our own minds, and made some estimate what we may expect from them, we shall not be inclined either to sit still, and not set our thoughts on work at all, in despair of knowing anything; nor on the other side, question everything, and declaim all knowledge, because some things are not to be understood.”
—John Locke (1632–1704)
“We Americans have the chance to become someday a nation in which all radical stocks and classes can exist in their own selfhoods, but meet on a basis of respect and equality and live together, socially, economically, and politically. We can become a dynamic equilibrium, a harmony of many different elements, in which the whole will be greater than all its parts and greater than any society the world has seen before. It can still happen.”
—Shirley Chisholm (b. 1924)
“We have done scant justice to the reasonableness of cannibalism. There are in fact so many and such excellent motives possible to it that mankind has never been able to fit all of them into one universal scheme, and has accordingly contrived various diverse and contradictory systems the better to display its virtues.”
—Ruth Benedict (1887–1948)
“every subjective phenomenon is essentially connected with a single point of view, and it seems inevitable that an objective, physical theory will abandon that point of view.”
—Thomas Nagel (b. 1938)