Is Cognitive Modularity Necessary in an Evolutionary Account of Development?

Geometry as a Universal Mental Construction

“…A first possibility would be that all humans have access to the spatial content of Euclidean geometry, either because we all come to learn A large part of the research effort in geometry has focused on navigation tasks, following the classic behavioral and neurophysiological research of Tolman [33] and O'Keefe and Nadel [34], respectively, and invigorated by Cheng's seminal discovery that animals use the geometry of their surroundings to establish their orientation [35]. The system encoding space for reorientation is truly geometric in the sense that it encodes information about the shape of the environment, and ignores featural information such as colors, or landmark objects [36] (but see [37] for a different view). However, the system of geometry-informed navigation fails to reach abstraction in two points.…”

Why evolutionary psychology should abandon modularity

“…While most psychologists and philosophers of mind would grant some degree of modularity to the mind, evolutionary psychology in particular is considered extreme in its endorsement of massive modularity-the notion that the mind is mostly, if not entirely, composed of different systems or modules (Bechtel, 2003;Samuels, 2000;. Massive modularity serves as a perennial grounds for skepticism or outright rejection of evolutionary psychology (reviewed in Goldfinch, 2015) and a lengthy debate over whether the mind is massively modular-or even in principle could be-has raged for over forty years with no resolution in sight (e.g., Barrett, 2005; 2015; Bechtel, 2003;Carruthers, 2003;Chiappe & Gardner, 2012;DeSteno et al, 2002;Ermer, Cosmides, & Tooby, 2007;Fodor, 1983;1998;Frankenhuis & Ploeger, 2007;Goldfinch, 2015;Hagen, 2016;MacDonald, 2008;Newcombe et al, 2009;Samuels, 2000;Seok, 2006;Sperber, 1994;Tooby, Cosmides, & Barrett, 2005).…”

“…A main point of contention is evolutionary psychology's claim that the mind is composed entirely of modules, rather than just containing a handful at the periphery-a thesis that came to be known as massive modularity (e.g., Bechtel, 2003;Samuels, 2000;Sperber, 1994;. Massive modularity is considered radical position, and sparked a decades' long back-and-forth in the literature (e.g., Chiappe & Gardner, 2012;DeSteno et al, 2002;Ermer, Cosmides, & Tooby, 2007;Fodor, 1998;Frankenhuis & Ploeger, 2007;Hagen, 2016;MacDonald, 2008;Newcombe et al, 2009;Samuels, 2000;Seok, 2006).…”

Integrating Programmatic Optimization and Learning Through Art

“…By adopting a Constructivist perspective, we reject the need to maintain the untenable assumption of objectivity. Optimization, implemented as game theory (pioneered by von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944; since integral to programming design as in Horzzyk & Tadeusiewicz, 2005), and designed modularity (Izhikevich, 2007; but see also Newcombe et al 2009) become artefacts of human behaviour. However, in his overview of neural networking, Olaf Sporns states that "Nervous Systems do not converge onto a final stable pattern of optimal functionality, rather, their connectivity continues to be in flux throughout life."…”