| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
YOKOYAMA Teruo Nanzan University, Faculty of Letters, Professor, 文学部, 教授 (80148303)
OSAWA Hidesuke Aichi University of Education, Faculty of Education, Professor, 教育学部, 教授 (50233094)
HATTORI Hiroyuki Nanzan University, Faculty of Letters, Professor, 文学部, 教授 (40110754)
TODAYAMA Kazuhisa Nagoya University, Center for Research on Higher Education, Associate-Professor, 高等教育研究センター, 助教授 (90217513)
SHIBATA Masayoshi Kanazawa University, Faculty of Letters, Associate-Professor, 文学部, 助教授 (20201543)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
To give a summary of our research results, abstracts of 7 papers constituting our 'REPORT OF RESEARCH RESULTS' (form #(12)) will be shown below, because this REPORT embodies a good part of the results attained by our research these 3 years.
Prof. Hattori presents a critical consideration on the question whether the so-called frame problem is resolved or dissolved by connectionism which is a new alternative to the classical approach in the AI research. Prof. Osawa tries to bring out a close connection between 'practical knowledge' in G. E. M. Anscombe's sense and the cognitive frame of human mind. Prof. Yokoyama's paper emphasizes the utmost importance of clearly distinguishing between 3 levels of problem, technological, scientific, and philosophical, when dealing with such themes as artificial life, connectionism, and folk psychology. In the context of a critical discussion on Prof. Haruki Ito's theory of 'shallow reference', Prof. Shibata addresses the question how we human beings can manage mutual linguistic comprehension despite the frame problem. Focusing on the 'Agent-in -Situation' approach proposed by such AI workers as Brooks, Prof. Todayama critically examines the thesis that the frame problem has been dissolved by this approach. Prof. Kashiwabata argues that the so-called frame problem is actually a cluster of various, but related, problems and tries to show how to properly sort out these problems from one another. Lastly, I (Mino) consider how cognitive science's studies of science itself may influence the philosophy of science, through criticizing Prof. Todayama's idea that the philosophy of science should be 'radically naturalized'.
I would like to add that to further develop its attained results, the participants of this research project are planning to publish a book on its subject and related matters in the near future.
|
