Why Externalism Is Not Part of Cognitive Science
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Why Externalism is not part of Cognitive Science Eran Asoulin ([email protected]) Program in Cognitive Science School of History & Philosophy of Science University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, 2052, AUSTRALIA. Abstract I will compare the Internalist and Externalist approach to Internalism meaning, and show that, given empirical scientific Internalism is not so much a particular thesis or a specific inclinations, the Externalist approach is somewhat misguided claim as it is a research program that articulates a certain and that parts of it can be reinterpreted via Internalism. I give conception of the study of language, language use, and the a brief overview of the nature of the problem of meaning or structure of the representations of linguistic objects inside intentionality; I then sketch out the nature of Internalism and how it deals with meaning, and conclude with a discussion of the minds of competent users of a particular language. Externalism and the ways in which Externalism can be recast Those who adhere to Internalism hold that, for the purposes in terms of Internalism without loss of explanatory power. I of scientific inquiry into the aforementioned areas of will argue that the foundations of Externalism and Internalism language, the internal properties of the human brain are are similar, and it is the Externalists, contrary to the overwhelmingly the ones that are the relevant and fruitful Internalists, who feel that these foundations are not sufficient areas of scientific research. Internalism has thus recast the for explaining meaning and intentionality. ordinary everyday notion of language, a notion that is Keywords: Philosophy of Mind; Semantics; Internalism; arguably at the core of Externalism, into a form that Externalism; Linguistics. Internalists believe is susceptible to empirical scientific inquiry. This is not to say that Internalism ignores the The Problem of Intentionality external environment in which an organism is embedded. As The problem at the crux of the Internalism/Externalism is evident in the case of language acquisition, on the debate concerns intentionality, or the problem of how some Internalist conception the environment plays a crucial and entities can be ‘about’ something. That is, sentences, necessary role of triggering and shaping the path that the thoughts, or symbols, among other things, display internal processes of the language faculty take. intentionality in that they are about something else; they are The linguistic enterprise spawned by the writings of a representation of something. (The thought ‘I would like to Noam Chomsky since the 1950s is a particular instantiation, see a giant squid’ is about giant squid.) The notion of probably the most well known and influential, of the intentionality can be traced back at least as far as Aristotle Internalist approach to meaning, thus I will use mainly his (Brentano, 1874/1973, p. 88), though Franz Brentano is writings to illustrate the research program that is generally credited with introducing the notion to Internalism1. contemporary philosophy. In order to understand Chomsky’s take on Internalism, While Brentano used such a definition of intentionality to one must become familiar with the basic framework of argue for a distinction between physical and mental Chomsky’s linguistic enterprise, which can be summarised phenomena (he did not believe that anything physical could as follows: display intentionality), both the Externalists and Internalists A person who has learned a language has acquired a attempt to solve the intentionality puzzle within a purely system of rules that relate sound and meaning in a certain physicalistic framework. It is a puzzle because, assuming specific way. He has, in other words, acquired a certain materialism and wanting a purely scientific explanation, competence that he puts to use in producing and there has been a spirited dispute over what, if anything, understanding speech. (Chomsky, 1972, p. 11) distinguishes the nature of some physical entities (for There are numerous issues, some more controversial than example, thoughts, symbols, sentences, etc.) that display others, raised in this short quotation that require elucidation, intentionality from other physical entities that do not (for for, in many cases, Chomsky utilises a term in a technical example, sea shells, leaves, wooden doors, etc.). The sense that is often divorced from its normal everyday Internalists claim that intentionality is practically a usage2. Perhaps the best place to start, then, is the language brain/mind-internal matter, whereas the Externalists claim acquisition process, in which any normal healthy child free that in order to explain intentionality some kind of relation (perhaps a causal one but not necessarily so) must be 1 For other authors who take an Internalist approach, see, for postulated to exist between objects outside the brain/mind example, Jackendoff (2002) or Pietroski (2005). and the brain/mind itself. 2 This is true of Chomsky’s notion of the ‘knowledge of language’, for example, which has caused much confusion and misunderstandings. 773 from specific brain damage is said by Chomsky and his syntax and semantics. Thus, the child’s innate principles of followers to acquire a language (this is in contrast to the Universal Grammar would be set to the specific parameters traditional or everyday notion of the child ‘learning’ a of the French grammar. This process of environmental language). Furthermore, it will become obvious by looking triggering of the innate mechanism, however, cannot occur at the language-acquisition process that, contrary to a at any other time but during the appropriate critical time of superficial reading, Internalism does not ignore or neglect cognitive development. the external environment; the brain/mind and the external The proposed innate mechanism that mediates the environment are distinct and are both essential in the acquisition of language is the language faculty, which is, Internalist conception of language and meaning. crudely speaking, a (probably computational) system that In other words, it is the story of the connection of mind to relates form and meaning. world that distinguishes Internalism from Externalism; as It must be understood that this linguistic hypothesis (of opposed to the uncharitable reading in which Internalism the internal and/or innate mechanism) is not as strong as has ignores the outside world and only focuses on brain/mind- been claimed or as may be plausible following an internal processes. uncharitable reading of Chomsky. Apart from triggering, the The language-acquisition process that a child undergoes environment also determines the arbitrary sound-meaning early in life arguably stands at the crux of Chomsky’s relationship of words and the reference of words (in the linguistic enterprise (at least in terms of evidence for the benign sense that a particular word is used by a linguistic theory). This rapid and seemingly effortless process that the community to point out an object in the world), there is child undergoes en route to acquiring the ability to produce nothing innate or internal that specifies that the word ‘squid’ and understand speech is explained by Chomsky via the must refer to a squid and must be pronounced the way it is postulation of an inner (probably an innate and mostly in English. Furthermore, the rules (or parameters) of unlearned) mechanism he calls the language faculty. Such a specific grammars are arbitrary in the sense that it is an mechanism, Chomsky argues, must exist to mediate the historical accident that Spanish has its particular language acquisition process, for the child, at such a young grammatical constructions whereas Mohawk has different age, does not seem to be exposed to all the necessary grammatical constructions. The internal and/or innate stimulus that would be required to acquire the ability to Universal Grammar makes specific human languages produce and understand speech were the child utilising possible not by prescribing particular rules (or linguistic general cognitive learning capacities (induction, deduction, parameters) but by constraining the possibilities that are imitation, rote memory, etc.). This claim is known as the available for the construction of specific languages. ‘poverty of the stimulus’ argument. Furthermore, a The language faculty, as delimited by Chomsky, is further Chomskyan would argue, even if the unlikely case could be refined by distinguishing it from both conceptual- made that the child is exposed to sufficient linguistic data intentional systems and performance systems that allow the general cognitive learning capacities to infer (predominantly the perceptual/articulatory systems). That is, the syntax and semantics of a particular language, children according to Chomsky, the language faculty constitutes the acquire their first language at a remarkable rate that is computational aspects of language, or ‘the generative entirely disproportionate to the other tasks that these general procedure that forms structural descriptions (SDs), each a cognitive learning capacities perform. complex of phonetic, semantic, and structural properties’ Chomsky claims that a person inherits a Universal (Chomsky, 1992, p. 211). These internal computational Grammar that provides the foundations for language to processes form the building blocks of language use: they develop. What is inherited is a universal, non language- generate linguistic (syntactic) objects that are employed by