The Fate of Cognitive Science

Glymour教授的研究重点是将统计学家、计算机科学家、数学心理学家和科学哲学家（包括PI和他以前的学生Kevin Kelly博士）开发的形式化方法应用于认知心理学的各个方面。具体来说，Glymour教授正在调查当代认知心理学可能无法成为一个成功研究项目的背景，因为认知心理学家试图解决的问题根本没有得到他们所能获得的证据的支持。在进行当代认知心理学的研究时，格里莫教授使用了西格蒙德·弗洛伊德在世纪之交之前的科学研究成果，作为一种方法论模型。他认为，弗洛伊德在19世纪90年代的理论和方法论方法在重要方面与许多当代认知心理学家相同。他进一步指出，弗洛伊德的科学事业没有变成一个成功的研究项目，原因与他认为当代认知科学存在问题的原因相同：这些问题没有得到证据的充分确定。最后，他想指出，正是当代认知心理学与弗洛伊德理论所共有的那些观点，即相似的目标和方法局限性，导致了当代科学中的这一问题。这项研究的目的并不是要论证当代认知心理学不应该被研究或不应该被支持。其目的是强调阐明备选方案的重要性，并坦率地考虑一个实验或整个研究项目在区分这些备选方案方面能做多少工作。

The focus of Professor Glymour's study is the application of formal methods developed by statisticians, computer scientists, mathematical psychologists and philosophers of science (including the PI and his former student, Dr. Kevin Kelly) to aspects of cognitive psychology. Specifically, Professor Glymour is investigating the contexts in which contemporary cognitive psychology may not turn into a successful research program because the questions cognitive psychologists seek to address are radically underdetermined by the kind of evidence available to them. In undertaking this study of contemporary cognitive psychology, Professor Glymour uses Sigmund Freud's scientific efforts until the turn of the century as a kind of methodological model. He argues that Freud's theoretical and methodological approaches in the 1890s are in important respects those of many contemporary cognitive psychologists. He further suggests that Freud's scientific enterprise did not turn into a successful research program for the same reasons that he sees problems with contemporary cognitive science: the questions are underdetermined by the evidence. Finally, he wants to argue that it is just those points that contemporary cognitive psychology share with Freud's theory, i.e. similar goals and methodological limitations, that lead to this problem in contemporary science. The aim of this study is not to argue that contemporary cognitive psychology ought not to be done or ought not to be supported. The aim is to emphasize the importance of articulating alternatives and giving frank consideration to how much or how little an experiment or an entire research program can do to distinguish among these alternatives.