Rules for Robotic Cooperation Based on Vygotsky and Piaget

Maia, Rosiery S.; Souza, Anderson; Gonalves, Luiz M. G.

doi:10.1109/lars-sbr.2015.71

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) is not new in the context of AI. However, no studies have presented the crucial role of contradiction (see e.g., Lindblom and Ziemke, 2003 ; Kofod-Petersen and Cassens, 2006 ; O’Leary, 2008 ; Mirolli and Parisi, 2011 ; Huang and Mutlu, 2012 ; Suchan and Bhatt, 2012 ; Dhuieb et al, 2015 ; Maia et al, 2015 ; Emel’yanov et al, 2016 ; Gonçalves et al, 2017 ; Tramonte et al, 2019 ). It is paradoxical to instrumentally accept CHAT “without serious reflection on the complex formation process of its theoretical background” ( Dafermos, 2014 , p. 148).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the tendency toward compromise, some pieces of the literature have considered Vygotsky and Piaget to be equivalent (see e.g., Stojanov, 2001 ; Maia et al, 2015 ), neglecting their radical contradictions (see Vygotsky, 1986 , p. 96). Additionally, in contrast to Vygotsky, other researchers have maintained that concepts, meaning formation, and language acquisition are, for Vygotsky, based on the direct associations among the components of experience (e.g., Billard et al, 1998 ; Billard and Dautenhahn, 1999 ; Mirolli and Parisi, 2011 ; Emel’yanov et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Artificial Intelligence Intensified the Crisis And Supported...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Artificial Intelligence Inheriting the Historical Crisis in Psychology: An Epistemological and Methodological Investigation of Challenges and Alternatives

Maouch

Jin

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By following the arguments developed by Vygotsky and employing the cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) in addition to dialectical logic, this paper attempts to investigate the interaction between psychology and artificial intelligence (AI) to confront the epistemological and methodological challenges encountered in AI research. The paper proposes that AI is facing an epistemological and methodological crisis inherited from psychology based on dualist ontology. The roots of this crisis lie in the duality between rationalism and objectivism or in the mind-body rupture that has governed the production of scientific thought and the proliferation of approaches. In addition, by highlighting the sociohistorical conditions of AI, this paper investigates the historical characteristics of the shift of the crisis from psychology to AI. Additionally, we examine the epistemological and methodological roots of the main challenges encountered in AI research by noting that empiricism is the dominant tendency in the field. Empiricism gives rise to methodological and practical challenges, including challenges related to the emergence of meaning, abstraction, generalization, the emergence of symbols, concept formation, functional reflection of reality, and the emergence of higher psychological functions. Furthermore, through discussing attempts to formalize dialectical logic, the paper, based on contradiction formation, proposes a qualitative epistemological, methodological, and formal alternative by using a preliminary algorithmic model that grasps the formation of meaning as an essential ability for the qualitative reflection of reality and the emergence of other mental functions.

show abstract