karl bühler digital

Home > Journal > Journal Issue > Journal article

Publication details

Year: 2016

Pages: 3763-3786

Series: Synthese

Full citation:

Mike Dacey, "Rethinking associations in psychology", Synthese 193 (12), 2016, pp. 3763-3786.

Abstract

I challenge the dominant understanding of what it means to say two thoughts are associated. The two views that dominate the current literature treat association as a kind of mechanism that drives sequences of thought (often implicitly treating them so). The first, which I call reductive associationism, treats association as a kind of neural mechanism. The second treats association as a feature of the kind of psychological mechanism associative processing. Both of these views are inadequate. I argue that association should instead be seen as a highly abstract filler term, standing in for causal relations between representational states in a system. Associations, so viewed, could be implemented by many different mechanisms. I outline the role that this view gives associative models as part of a top-down characterization of psychological processes of any kind and of any complexity.

Publication details

Year: 2016

Pages: 3763-3786

Series: Synthese

Full citation:

Mike Dacey, "Rethinking associations in psychology", Synthese 193 (12), 2016, pp. 3763-3786.