Models of cognition: The classical/connectionist debate

Fodor's the language of thought hypothesis (LOT) and Smolensky's connectionism are examined. The systematicity debate is also examined. Fodor and Pylyshyn are correct in claiming that Smolensky's connectionism does not provide an account of systematicity. However, it is argued that Clark's connectionism does provide an account of systematicity though it is left open as to whether such an account is merely an implementation of the LOT. It is then argued that connectionism can trivially handle other cases concerning human cognition whereas the LOT cannot. Due to this, even if at one level of analysis connectionism is an implementation of the LOT, it offers a more viable and robust theory of human cognition.