caa a22 4500 605475172 CHVBK 20210128105155.0 cr unu---uuuuu 210128e20150901xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/s10516-015-9275-x doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10516-015-9275-x Bickhard Mark Lehigh University, 17 Memorial Drive East, 18015, Bethlehem, PA, USA aut Toward a Model of Functional Brain Processes I: Central Nervous System Functional Micro-architecture [Elektronische Daten] [Mark Bickhard] Standard semantic information processing models—information in; information processed; information out (in the form of utterances or actions)—lend themselves to standard models of the functioning of the brain in terms, e.g., of threshold-switch neurons connected via classical synapses. That is, in terms of sophisticated descendants of McCulloch and Pitts models (Bull Math Biophys 7:115-133, 1943). I argue that both the cognition and the brain sides of this framework are incorrect: cognition and thought are not constituted as forms of semantic information processing, and the brain does not function in terms of passive input processing units (e.g., threshold switch neurons or connectionist nodes) organized as neural nets. An alternative framework is developed that models cognition and thought not in terms of semantic information processing, and, correspondingly, models brain functional processes also not in terms of semantic information processing. As alternative to such models: (1) I outline a pragmatist oriented, interaction based (rather than reception or input-processing based), model of representation; (2) derive from this model a fundamental framework of constraints on how the brain must function; (3) show that such a framework is in fact found in the brain, and (4) develop the outlines of a broader model of how mental processes can be realized within this alternative framework. Part I of this discussion focuses on some criticisms of standard modeling frameworks for representation and cognition, and outlines an alternative interactivist, pragmatist oriented, model. In part II, the focus is on the fact that the brain does not, in fact, function in accordance with standard passive input processing models—e.g., information processing models. Instead, there are multiple endogenously active processes at multiple spatial and temporal scales across multiple kinds of cells. A micro-functional model that accounts for, and even predicts, these multi-scale phenomena in generating emergent representation and cognition is outlined. That is, I argue that the interactivist model of representation outlined offers constraints on how the brain should function that are in fact empirically found, and, in reverse, that the multifarious details of brain functioning entail the pragmatist representational model—a very strong interrelationship. In the sequel paper, starting with part III, this model is extended to address macro-functioning in the CNS. In part IV, I offer a discussion of an approach to brain functioning that has some similarities with, as well as differences from, the model presented here: sometimes called the predictive brain approach. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 2015 Interactivism nationallicence Representation nationallicence Learning nationallicence Brain attractor landscapes nationallicence Astrocytes nationallicence Predictive brain nationallicence Axiomathes Springer Netherlands 25/3(2015-09-01), 217-238 1122-1151 25:3<217 2015 25 10516 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-015-9275-x text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-015-9275-x text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Bickhard Mark Lehigh University, 17 Memorial Drive East, 18015, Bethlehem, PA, USA aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Axiomathes Springer Netherlands 25/3(2015-09-01), 217-238 1122-1151 25:3<217 2015 25 10516 SWISSBIB 605475172