What Is Tamler?

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

According to the author's this corresponds to what dennet called the design stand which i understood as like, this is what this mechanism is for. If so, it can do this kind of thing. Is that right? You know, i don't remember how dennet talks about it, but it seems to make sense. Because what i think they're saying is that you can view the mind as as a whole bunch of these sub processes that were probably selected for and you can explain all of those in terms of inputs outputs. So at this sort of computationa layer, this abstraction, at the level of computation, where if you ask somebody about, like, well,

David and Tamler talk about the often rancorous debate among cognitive scientists and evolutionary psychologists over whether the mind is modular -- composed of discrete systems responsible for vision, reasoning, cheater detection, sexual jealousy, and so on. David and Tamler (mostly David) describe the history of the debate, then dive into a recent paper (Pietraszewski & Wertz, 2021) arguing that virtually all the disagreement is the product of a conceptual and methodological confusion â€“ that the two sides are operating with different levels of analysis and talking past each other as a result.

Plus, we REALLY tried not to talk about the University of Austin thing for the whole opening segment. We had another topic lined up and everything. It just didnâ€™t work out. Cicero would understand. Bari Weiss stans might wanna skip to the main segment.