Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Is the Mind Massively Modular?

By Richard Samuels

Abstract

Articl

Topics: PHI
Year: 2006
OAI identifier: oai:sas-space.sas.ac.uk:944
Provided by: SAS-SPACE

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1993). Artificial Intelligence: A Philosophical Introduction. doi
  2. (1992). Beyond Modularity.
  3. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. doi
  4. (1984). Computation and Cognition.
  5. (2004). Core systems of number. doi
  6. (2000). Cross-paradigm analysis of autonomous agent architecture. doi
  7. (1991). Directing spatial attention within an object: altering the functional equivalence of shape descriptions.
  8. (2005). Does the human brain process objects of expertise like faces? A review of the evidence.
  9. (2003). Does the selection task detect cheater detection? In
  10. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity hypothesis.
  11. (2000). Evolutionary Psychology. doi
  12. (1996). Explaining Culture: A Naturalistic Approach.
  13. (1998). Folk biology and the anthropology of science: Cognitive universals and cultural particulars. doi
  14. (2004). Grammatical language impairment and the specificity of cognitive domains: Relations between auditory and language abilities. doi
  15. (1997). How the Mind Works.
  16. (2002). In defense of massive modularity.
  17. (2005). Is the Human Mind Massively Modular? 55
  18. (1992). Is there a faculty of social cognition?
  19. (1999). Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception.
  20. Massive modularity and the first principle of relevance. In
  21. Massively modular minds: Evolutionary psychology and cognitive architecture.
  22. (1998). Mental retardation, general intelligence and modularity. doi
  23. (1995). Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. doi
  24. (1999). Modularity and cognition. doi
  25. (2003). On Fodor’s problem. doi
  26. (1995). On the origins of causal understanding.
  27. (2005). On the plausibility of adaptations for homicide. In doi
  28. (1994). Origins of domain specificity: the evolution of functional organization.
  29. (2004). Practical reasoning in a modular mind. doi
  30. (1992). Reasoning about social contracts: Cheating and perspective change.
  31. (1995). Relevance theory explains the selection task. doi
  32. Reply to Steven Pinker: “So how does the mind work?”
  33. (1980). Samuels CDIC03
  34. (2002). Science without grammar: Scientific reasoning in severe agrammatic aphasia. In
  35. (2001). Severe impairment in grammar does not preclude theory of mind. doi
  36. (1999). Sources of flexibility in human cognition: Dual-task studies of space and language.
  37. (1990). The Adaptive Character of Thought. doi
  38. (1962). The architecture of complexity.
  39. (1996). The architecture of the mind: modularity and modularization.
  40. (1998). The autonomy of the visual systems and the modularity of conscious vision, doi
  41. The case for modularity: Sin or salvation?
  42. (2004). The cognitive foundations of cultural stability and diversity. doi
  43. (2005). The complexity of cognition: tractability arguments for massive modularity. In
  44. (1994). The Language Instinct.
  45. (1989). The logic of social exchange: has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with Wason Selection Task. doi
  46. (2000). The Mind doesn’t Work that Way.
  47. (1983). The Modularity of Mind.
  48. (1996). The modularity of theory of mind.
  49. (1994). The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations.
  50. (1990). The Organization of Learning.
  51. (1999). The parahippocampal place area: recognition, navigation, or encoding? doi
  52. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture.
  53. (2000). The replacement of general-purpose learning models with adaptively specialized learning modules.
  54. (1991). Today the earwig, tomorrow man.
  55. (1990). Unified Theories of Cognition.
  56. (1999). Vision Science: Photons to Phenomenology.
  57. (1994). Why the distinction between single-event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa).
  58. (1997). Words, Thoughts and Theories.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.