The best game in town: The reemergence of the language-of-thought hypothesis across the cognitive sciences
- PMID: 36471543
- DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X22002849
The best game in town: The reemergence of the language-of-thought hypothesis across the cognitive sciences
Abstract
Mental representations remain the central posits of psychology after many decades of scrutiny. However, there is no consensus about the representational format(s) of biological cognition. This paper provides a survey of evidence from computational cognitive psychology, perceptual psychology, developmental psychology, comparative psychology, and social psychology, and concludes that one type of format that routinely crops up is the language-of-thought (LoT). We outline six core properties of LoTs: (i) discrete constituents; (ii) role-filler independence; (iii) predicate-argument structure; (iv) logical operators; (v) inferential promiscuity; and (vi) abstract content. These properties cluster together throughout cognitive science. Bayesian computational modeling, compositional features of object perception, complex infant and animal reasoning, and automatic, intuitive cognition in adults all implicate LoT-like structures. Instead of regarding LoT as a relic of the previous century, researchers in cognitive science and philosophy-of-mind must take seriously the explanatory breadth of LoT-based architectures. We grant that the mind may harbor many formats and architectures, including iconic and associative structures as well as deep-neural-network-like architectures. However, as computational/representational approaches to the mind continue to advance, classical compositional symbolic structures - that is, LoTs - only prove more flexible and well-supported over time.
Keywords: animal cognition; automaticity; cognitive architecture; deep learning; dual-process theories; implicit attitudes; infant cognition; language-of-thought; object files; visual cognition.
Comment in
-
Toward biologically plausible artificial vision.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e290. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001930. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766603
-
Compositionality in visual perception.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e277. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001838. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766604
-
Putting relating at the core of language-of-thought.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e272. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001978. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766609
-
Is core knowledge in the format of LOT?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e291. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001966. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766612
-
Is evidence of language-like properties evidence of a language-of-thought architecture?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e264. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001875. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766613
-
Perception is iconic, perceptual working memory is discursive.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e265. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001899. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766617
-
Stop me if you've heard this one before: The Chomskyan hammer and the Skinnerian nail.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e282. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001851. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766619
-
Never not the best: LoT and the explanation of person-level psychology.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e262. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001929. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766620
-
The reemergence of the language-of-thought hypothesis: Consequences for the development of the logic of thought.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e268. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001802. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766621
-
Advanced testing of the LoT hypothesis by social reasoning.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e276. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X2300184X. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766622
-
Linguistic meanings in mind.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e289. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001887. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766624
-
Do nonlinguistic creatures deploy mental symbols for logical connectives in reasoning?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e267. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001917. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766630
-
The computational and the representational language-of-thought hypotheses.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e269. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001796. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766631
-
Natural logic and baby LoTH.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e266. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001942. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766633
-
Linguistic structure and the languages-of-thought.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e274. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23002054. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766642
-
On the hazards of relating representations and inductive biases.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e275. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23002042. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766644
-
Incomplete language-of-thought in infancy.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e278. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001826. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766647
-
Representational structures only make their mark over time: A case from memory.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e263. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001905. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766654
-
The language of tactile thought.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e270. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X2300208X. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766664
-
Language-of-thought hypothesis: Wrong, but sometimes useful?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e288. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23001991. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766665
-
Concept learning in a probabilistic language-of-thought. How is it possible and what does it presuppose?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Sep 28;46:e271. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23002029. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37766667
-
Puritanical morality and the scaffolded evolution of self-control.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e319. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000535. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789534
-
There are no beautiful surfaces without a terrible depth.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e318. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000420. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789538
-
Is undisciplined behavior antithetical to cooperation, or is it part and parcel of it?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e315. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000304. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789541
-
Are we all implicit puritans? New evidence that work and sex are intuitively moralized in both traditional and non-traditional cultures.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e317. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000390. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789543
-
Little puritans?Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e314. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000328. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789546
-
Purity is linked to cooperation but not necessarily through self-control.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e311. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000316. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789547
-
Moral emotions underlie puritanical morality.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e321. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000353. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789549
-
Considering the role of self-interest in moral disciplining.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e310. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000432. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789551
-
The many faces of moralized self-control: Puritanical morality is not reducible to cooperation concerns.Behav Brain Sci. 2023 Oct 4;46:e320. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X23000419. Behav Brain Sci. 2023. PMID: 37789555
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources