Enactivism,Computation,Dynamical Systems
Michael Wood
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that the computational theory of mind is inadequate and that a nonlinear dynamical systems model, featuring transient strange attractors, better explains mind/brain behavior and aligns with enactivism. |
Abstract
The following argues that the computational theory of mind (CTM) despite superficial similarities at the neuron level does not adequately account for brain/mind behavior as we currently understand it . It is argued rather that a mathematical dynamic (nonlinear dynamical systems) model of the brain, particularly the emergence of transient strange attractors is much more plausible as a mind/brain model. This has the advantage that it is much more compatible with the view of the brain mind from Enactivism. This could provide a basis for a unified treatment of the mind/brain.