{"id":4567,"date":"2025-09-21T11:03:20","date_gmt":"2025-09-21T11:03:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/?post_type=blog_content&p=4567"},"modified":"2025-09-21T11:13:46","modified_gmt":"2025-09-21T11:13:46","slug":"radikali-radikallestirmek-radikal-dissalci-bir-bilis-biyolojisine-dogru-1-sunus-ozet-giris","status":"publish","type":"blog_content","link":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/blog_content\/radikali-radikallestirmek-radikal-dissalci-bir-bilis-biyolojisine-dogru-1-sunus-ozet-giris\/","title":{"rendered":"Radikali Radikalle\u015ftirmek: Radikal D\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131 Bir Bili\u015f Biyolojisine Do\u011fru #1 – Sunu\u015f, \u00d6zet, Giri\u015f \u2014 Yunus \u015eahin"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sunu\u015f<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ben 2016\u2019da bili\u015fsel bilime y\u00f6nelmek maksad\u0131yla \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi\u2019nde dilbilim okumaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131mda, daha ilk derslerden itibaren \u00e7e\u015fitli sorular kafam\u0131 kurcalamaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131. \u00d6zellikle Chomsky\u2019nin a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 yolda, bili\u015fsel bilim ve biyolojinin bir altdal\u0131 olarak konumlanan \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f ve zihinselci (mentalist) dilbilimde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fimiz analizler, ortaya att\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z teoriler ve analizler, ister sentaktik, ister semantik, ister morfolojik, isterse fonolojik seviyede olsun tamamen formel ve soyuttu. Dahas\u0131, bu formel ve soyut mekanizmalar\u0131n ayn\u0131 zamanda zihinsel oldu\u011fu iddia ediliyor, zihinde var olduklar\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcl\u00fcyordu. \u00d6rne\u011fin, sentaks a\u011fa\u00e7lar\u0131 \u00e7iziyor, mant\u0131ksal form\u00fclasyonlar ile c\u00fcmlesel anlam\u0131 ele al\u0131yor ya da farkl\u0131 g\u00f6sterimlerle dilin zihinde nas\u0131l \u2018ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini\u2019 a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yorduk. T\u00fcm bunlar\u0131n \u2018zihinde\u2019 ve \u2018beyinde\u2019 nas\u0131l var olabildi\u011fi ise akl\u0131m\u0131 kurcal\u0131yordu. \u0130lk ba\u015fta sorunun, eskinin anaak\u0131m bili\u015fsel bilimindeki mod\u00fclerite teziyle ilgili olabilece\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fcm. Zihinde ve beyin dil, g\u00f6rsel alg\u0131, bellek vs. gibi farkl\u0131 i\u015flevler i\u00e7in \u00f6zelle\u015fmi\u015f mod\u00fcler sistemlerin var oldu\u011funu, bu sistemlerin kendi i\u00e7lerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131n izole \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini, birbirleriyle yaln\u0131zca girdi-\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131 ili\u015fisi kurduklar\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyd\u00fc bu. Fakat psikodilbilim ve n\u00f6rodilbilim disiplinleri ve ayn\u0131 zamanda bili\u015fsel dilbilim ekol\u00fc bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn tam aksi fikirlere ve bulgulara ev sahipli\u011fi yap\u0131yordu. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu alanlara y\u00f6neldim. Zihinde, beyinde her \u015feyin birbiriyle i\u00e7 i\u00e7e ve olduk\u00e7a da\u011f\u0131t\u0131k \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi fikri bana \u00e7ok cazip ve makul g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. \u00d6zellikle n\u00f6ral a\u011flara dayanan ba\u011flant\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131, buradan ne\u015fet eden modelleme pratikleri vs. psikolojik ve n\u00f6robilimsel a\u00e7\u0131dan \u00e7ok daha makul g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. Bu \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalara y\u00f6nelmek, bili\u015fsel i\u015flevlerin izole ve soyut \u015fekilde de\u011fil tam da psikolojik ve n\u00f6robilimsel mekanizmalarla, ger\u00e7ek hayattaki ba\u011flam ve durumlara hassas \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi fikrini kuvvetlendiriyordu. Buna paralel \u015fekilde, \u00f6zellikle dilbilimin bedensel bili\u015f (embodied cognition) ile kesi\u015fen taraflar\u0131, mesela Lakoff ve Barsalou gibi temsilsel bedensel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri ilgimi \u00e7ekmeye ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131. Bunlar soyut ve izole mekanizmalar \u00f6ne s\u00fcrmek yerine, bedenin, beynin vs. nas\u0131l \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na odaklanarak, zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131 buradan t\u00fcretmeye, zihinsel mekanizmalarla bu s\u00fcre\u00e7ler aras\u0131nda bir e\u015fle\u015fme aramaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131yorlard\u0131. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bedensel bili\u015f \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda psikodilbilim ve n\u00f6rodilbilim \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131na y\u00f6neldim. Bu ba\u011flamda \u015fu anda akl\u0131ma ilk gelen ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131lardan ikisi ise tabii ki Pulverm\u00fcller ve Glenberg idi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ancak \u00e7ok ge\u00e7meden buran\u0131n da benim sordu\u011fum soruya bir yan\u0131t sa\u011flayamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 fark ettim. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc n\u00f6rodilbilim ve psikodilbilim \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131nda hala elimizdeki varsay\u0131lan zihinsel mekanizmalara bir kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k ar\u0131yorduk. Fakat bu zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n nereden geldi\u011fi yahut \u2018aranmas\u0131 do\u011fru\u2019 mekanizmalar olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bir kriter yahut temel ortal\u0131kta g\u00f6r\u00fcnm\u00fcyordu. Kurulan hipotezler, tasarlanan deneyler vs. zaten bu zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131 varsay\u0131yor, ancak ard\u0131ndan bu zihinsel mekanizmalar aras\u0131nda bir k\u0131yasa gitmek \u00fczere kullan\u0131l\u0131yordu. Ben ise en temelde bu zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n nas\u0131l \u2018belirdi\u011fini\u2019 (emerge) etti\u011fini merak ediyordum. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc \u015fu veya bu fiziksel sistemin, e\u011fer yeterince karma\u015f\u0131k bir sistemse \u015fu, verili herhangi bir k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 say\u0131da soyut ve\/ya zihinsel mekanizma seti i\u00e7inde hangisi ile \u2018daha uyumlu\u2019 oldu\u011funu test etmek her zaman m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fc. Bu testin sonucunda birtak\u0131m mekanizmalar\u0131 di\u011ferlerine tercih edebilirdik. Fakat bu eldeki k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 say\u0131daki soyut ve zihinsel mekanizma setinin \u2018test edilmesi gereken\u2019 set olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bize bir \u015fey s\u00f6ylemiyordu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bu sefer cevab\u0131n geli\u015fimsel psikoloji ve bili\u015fsel geli\u015fim literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde olabilece\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fcm. Neticede yeti\u015fkinlerle \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken bu soyut ve zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n, soyut ve zihinsel varl\u0131klar\u0131n zaten geli\u015fim s\u00fcrecinde \u2018ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcl\u00fcyordu. O halde geli\u015fim \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n bunlar\u0131n nas\u0131l ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair net bir \u00e7er\u00e7eve sa\u011flayabilece\u011fini ummu\u015ftum. Bu alanda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m okumalar ise yine bu soruya yan\u0131t sa\u011flamakta yeterli olamad\u0131. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc bu alanda da, farkl\u0131 geli\u015fimsel a\u015famalardaki \u00e7ocuklarla deneyler yap\u0131lsa da, bu deneyler \u00e7e\u015fitli zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131 zaten varsay\u0131yor, yaln\u0131zca hangi zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n hangi ya\u015flarda var oldu\u011funu ve hangilerinin var olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 test ediyordu. \u00d6rne\u011fin 6 ayl\u0131k bir bebekte falanca bili\u015fsel i\u015flev ve bunu sa\u011flayan \u2018zihinsel mekanizmalar\u2019 geli\u015fmemi\u015fken, 2 ya\u015f\u0131ndaki bir \u00e7ocukta bunlar\u0131n geli\u015fmi\u015f oldu\u011funu bize s\u00f6yleyebiliyordu; daha do\u011frusu sordu\u011fu soru bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede \u015fekilleniyor ve yine psikodilbilim ve n\u00f6rodilbilimde oldu\u011fu gibi \u00e7e\u015fitli soyut ve zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n k\u0131yas\u0131na dayan\u0131yordu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lisans\u0131m\u0131n son y\u0131l\u0131nda, Gy\u00f6rgy Buzsaki\u2019nin \u201cBrain from Inside Out\u201d kitab\u0131n\u0131 da okumamla birlikte soruya farkl\u0131 \u015fekilde yakla\u015fmam\u0131z gerekti\u011fine kani oldum. Sormam\u0131z gereken soru hangi i\u015flemlemesel ve temsilsel mekanizmalar\u0131n zihinde olabilece\u011fi ile ba\u015flamam\u0131l\u0131yd\u0131. Tam aksine, beynin kendi k\u0131s\u0131tlar\u0131 itibariyle ne gibi yap\u0131lar \u00fcretebilece\u011fi sorusu ile ba\u015flamal\u0131, bunu bir k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131l\u0131k ve temel sayarak i\u015flemlemesel ve temsilsel mekanizmalara do\u011fru ilerlemeliydik. Yani hangi zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131n var olabilece\u011fini izole \u015fekilde de\u011fil, beynin k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131na dayanarak teorize etmeliydik. Bu, Marr\u2019\u0131n \u00fc\u00e7 seviyeli analizini tersine \u00e7evirmek demek oluyordu. Yani i\u015flemlemesel seviyeden ba\u015flayarak bu i\u015flemlemelerin hangi temsil ve algoritmalar\u0131 gerektirdi\u011fini sorup sonra da bunlar\u0131n beyinde nas\u0131l implement edildi\u011fine bakmamal\u0131yd\u0131k. Aksine, beynin implementasyonunun k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zeterek ne gibi d\u00fczenliliklerin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 sormal\u0131, bu d\u00fczenliliklerin hangi temsil ve algoritmalar\u0131 \u00fcretti\u011fini cevaplamal\u0131 ve ancak sonra bu temsil ve algoritmalar\u0131n \u2018ne i\u015fe yarad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131\u2019 sormal\u0131yd\u0131k. Yani beyin gibi dinamik ve \u00e7ok de\u011fi\u015fken fiziksel bir sistemin ne gibi stabilite ve sabiteler (invariant) yaratt\u0131\u011f\u0131na odaklanmal\u0131yd\u0131k en ba\u015fta. Bu beni i\u015flemlemesel n\u00f6robilim literat\u00fcr\u00fcne y\u00f6nlendirdi. Da\u011f\u0131t\u0131k bir sistemden sembolik ve birle\u015fimsel (combinatorial) d\u00fczenliliklerin nas\u0131l belirdi\u011fine bu disiplindeki \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalarla yan\u0131t verilebilece\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmeye ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131m. Fakat burada yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m okumalar da bu disiplinin ba\u015fat olarak bununla ilgilenmedi\u011fini, b\u00f6yle bir yakla\u015f\u0131m benimsemedi\u011fini bana g\u00f6sterdi. Burada da en temelde birtak\u0131m algoritmalar \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcyor, ard\u0131ndan bu algoritmalar\u0131n hangilerinin beyinde daha kolay ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilebilece\u011fine bak\u0131l\u0131yordu. Fakat bu algoritmalar temelini tamamen m\u00fchendislik kriterlerinden al\u0131yordu. Sordu\u011fum soruya en yak\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131rma sahas\u0131 olan n\u00f6ro-sembolik mimari ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131 dahi da\u011f\u0131t\u0131k n\u00f6ral a\u011flar\u0131, zaten ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131n\u0131n kendisinin sisteme empoze etti\u011fi, sistem i\u00e7in belirledi\u011fi sembolik yakla\u015f\u0131mlarla nas\u0131l \u2018uyumlu\u2019 ve etkile\u015fimli k\u0131l\u0131nabilece\u011fine odaklan\u0131yordu. (Bu a\u00e7\u0131dan bir istisna yine Buzsaki\u2019nin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131ndan esinlenen Andrea E. Martin\u2019in n\u00f6ro-i\u015flemlemesel mimarisi olabilir. Fakat bence onun da bu sunu\u015f metninde de\u011finemeyece\u011fimiz ba\u015fka teorik sorunlar\u0131 vard\u0131.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neticede \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fck\u00e7e benim sordu\u011fum sorunun ve merak etti\u011fim meselenin zihin-beden probleminden ba\u015fka bir problem olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 fark ettim. Bu soru en temelde a priori, pre-empirik bir soruydu ve ontolojik, felsefi ara\u00e7larla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gerekiyordu. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc alandaki empirik ve formel \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar hemen her zaman zaten bu soruya dair i\u015flevselci bir yan\u0131t\u0131 varsayarak, bu temel \u00fczerine bina oluyordu. Bunu y\u0131llara yay\u0131lan okumalar\u0131m\u0131n i\u00e7inde fark etmi\u015ftim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

T\u00fcm bunlara paralel bedensel bili\u015f \u00fczerine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar da beni giderek daha temsil kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131 bir pozisyona itiyordu. O zamanlarda Clark ve Chalmers\u2019\u0131n \u00f6ne s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc geni\u015f zihin (extended mind) tezi bana olduk\u00e7a makul g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc zihin asla yaln\u0131zca beynin veya bedenin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7inde in\u015fa olmuyor, her daim \u00e7evreyle etkile\u015fimden kuruluyor, \u00e7evreyi de bir oranda i\u00e7eriyordu. Zihinsel temsillerin nas\u0131l \u2018belirdi\u011fine\u2019 dair bir yan\u0131t bulamamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131m. Hatta buna bir yan\u0131t verilebilece\u011finden de \u015f\u00fcphe ediyordum. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc temsil kavram\u0131n\u0131n ancak ve ancak normatif ve y\u00f6nelimsel oldu\u011fu takdirde anlaml\u0131 oldu\u011fu kabul\u00fc \u2013ki zihinsel temsil literat\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn b\u00fcy\u00fck k\u0131sm\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kabul edilir- normatif hi\u00e7bir kavram haznesinin nat\u00fcralistik bilimde yeri olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmemden \u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fc, temsil kavram\u0131n\u0131 benim i\u00e7in tamamen bilim d\u0131\u015f\u0131na itiyordu. Bunun yan\u0131 s\u0131ra geni\u015f zihin yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 bana ikna edici g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. (Yanl\u0131\u015f anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n, geni\u015f zihin tezlerinin \u00e7o\u011fu temsilsel ve i\u015flemlemeseldir, yani yukar\u0131da bahsetti\u011fim soyut ve zihinsel mekanizmalar\u0131 zaten kabul ederler, sadece bu mekanizmalar\u0131n beyin ve bedenle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00e7evreye yay\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu savunurlar.) O zamanlar, Dewhurst ve Villalobos gibi ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131lar\u0131n ge\u00e7 2010\u2019larda yaz\u0131p \u00e7izdiklerinden, \u00f6ne s\u00fcrd\u00fcklerinden hareketle, temsilsel olmayan fakat i\u015flemlemesel olan bir geni\u015f zihin \u00e7er\u00e7evesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilece\u011fine inanmaya ba\u015flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131m. Neticede do\u011fadaki pek \u00e7ok fenomeni matematikle modelleyebiliyorduk, zihni de \u00e7evreyle etkile\u015fimi i\u00e7inde matematikle ve i\u015flemleme ile modellememiz de bir beis yok gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcyordu. Fakat burada da bir problem vard\u0131. Herhangi bir sistemi, ister bir duvar olsun ister bir atom ister meteoroloji isterse de canl\u0131 bir organizma, matematiksel yahut i\u015flemlemesel \u015fekilde modellemek zaten m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fc. Bu matemati\u011fin ve i\u015flemlemenin do\u011fas\u0131yla alakal\u0131 bir \u015feydi. Bunlar verili herhangi bir fenomeni modelledi\u011fimiz, titiz, kuvvetli \u2018diller\u2019di ve benim i\u00e7in yaln\u0131zca insan icad\u0131yd\u0131. (Hi\u00e7bir zaman i\u00e7in evrenin \u2018kendi yap\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n\u2019 matematiksel oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmemi\u015ftim. Matemati\u011fe dair bu in\u015fac\u0131 [constructivist] tutumum ergenken yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m Nietzsche okumalar\u0131na ve pragmatizme dayan\u0131yordu.) Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bizim bili\u015fsel s\u00fcre\u00e7leri temsiller olmadan bir \u015fekilde i\u015flemlemesel \u015fekilde betimleyebilmemiz, bunlar\u0131n o sistemlerin \u2018kendilerinin\u2019 nas\u0131l \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bir a\u00e7\u0131klama getirmiyordu. Yani bu kapasiteden hareketle zihnin ve beynin do\u011fas\u0131na dair ontolojik bir iddiada bulunmam\u0131z makul de\u011fildi. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla zihnin ve beynin \u2018i\u015flemlemesel\u2019 oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyebilmemiz i\u00e7in hala yeterli gerek\u00e7eden yoksundum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2021 y\u0131l\u0131nda Bo\u011fazi\u00e7i \u00dcniversitesi\u2019nde daha sonra arkada\u015f\u0131m ve tez dan\u0131\u015fman\u0131m olacak O\u011fuz Erdin\u2019den ald\u0131\u011f\u0131m \u201cMind Dynamics\u201d dersi vas\u0131tas\u0131yla James Gibson\u2019\u0131n ekolojik psikolojisine ve Mark Bickhard\u2019\u0131n interaktivizmiyle yak\u0131ndan i\u015ftigal etme f\u0131rsat\u0131 buldum. Ekolojik psikolojiyi zaten daha \u00f6nceden biliyordum fakat bana hi\u00e7bir \u015fey ifade etmiyor, bu ekol\u00fc bir t\u00fcrl\u00fc anlayam\u0131yordum. Bickhard\u2019\u0131n Gibson \u00fczerine yaz\u0131lar\u0131 ve ayn\u0131 zamanda kendi geli\u015ftirdi\u011fi interaktivizm ekol\u00fc bu a\u00e7\u0131dan ayd\u0131nlat\u0131c\u0131 olmu\u015f, bu ekolleri yak\u0131ndan tan\u0131yabilmi\u015ftim. Bu ekollerin detaylar\u0131na burada girmeye gerek yok. Fakat ekolojik psikoloji ve interaktivizmin bana g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi \u015fey en temelde, benim bili\u015fsel bilimdeki temel sorgulamalar\u0131m\u0131n yaln\u0131zca bili\u015fsel bilimle de\u011fil, bilim felsefesi, dil felsefesi, epistemoloji, metafizik, metafelsefe gibi alanlardaki temel meselelerle ili\u015fkili oldu\u011fuydu. \u0130nteraktivizm her ne kadar sistemli ve b\u00fct\u00fcnc\u00fcl bir yakla\u015f\u0131m olsa da, \u00f6ne s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc belirim metafizi\u011fi, bilimsel ve metafizik realizmi, ve bilim-felsefe ili\u015fkisine dair sahip oldu\u011fu kimi kabuller onu b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle kabul etmemi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131lm\u0131yordu. Tezimi tefrika etti\u011fim bu yaz\u0131 dizisinin sonunda, okurlar i\u00e7in bu kabullerin neler oldu\u011funun sarih k\u0131l\u0131naca\u011f\u0131na inan\u0131yorum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sonu\u00e7 olarak bu tez, bu sorgulamalar\u0131n \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131. Tezin b\u00fcy\u00fck k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n bilim felsefesine ayr\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n, s\u0131k s\u0131k dil felsefesi, metafelsefe, metafizik gibi alanlara s\u0131\u00e7ray\u0131p konuya geri d\u00f6n\u00fclmesinin sebebi de bu. Bu tezi CogIST\u2019te tefrika ediyorken temel kayg\u0131lar\u0131mdan biri, yaz\u0131lan tezlerin kaderi olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclen ve akademideki hemen herkes\u00e7e kabul edilen \u2018kimselerce okunmama\u2019 durumunu biraz olsun a\u015fma iste\u011fim. Biraz da bu sebeple tezi T\u00fcrk\u00e7e\u2019ye \u00e7eviriyorken okunakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 artt\u0131rmak ad\u0131na kelimesi kelimesine bir \u00e7eviriden uzakla\u015farak yer yer ufak a\u00e7\u0131klamalar ekledim ve k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck de\u011fi\u015fikliklerde bulundum. Bununla birlikte, bu tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n, bir anlamda teorik ve felsefi bir krizde olan bilimler ve \u00f6zellikle bili\u015fsel bilim a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan faydal\u0131 oldu\u011funa inan\u0131yorum \u2013 okur buradaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flere kat\u0131lmasa bile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Son olarak, soru, yorum ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleriniz i\u00e7in her zaman bana ula\u015fabilece\u011finizi hat\u0131rlatmak isterim. Keyifli okumalar diliyorum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00d6zet<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bu tezde bili\u015fsel bilime radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131 bir yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n anahatlar\u0131n\u0131, neden gerekti\u011fini ve ne gibi faydalar\u0131 olabilece\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yorum. Bili\u015fsel bilimdeki farkl\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evelerin etraf\u0131nda k\u00fcmelendi\u011fi i\u00e7selcilik-d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k ve temsilcilik-temsil kar\u015f\u0131tl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hatlar\u0131n\u0131n arg\u00fcmentatif ad\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131 takip ediyor ve varsay\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131 tespit ediyorum. Bu varsay\u0131mlar\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda realizm, \u00e7oklu ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilirlik ve \u00f6zel bilimlerin otonomisi geliyor. Bu varsay\u0131mlar\u0131n bili\u015fsel bilimdeki hemen hemen t\u00fcm \u00e7er\u00e7eveler i\u00e7in zihinsel nedensellik ve i\u00e7erik zor problemine yol a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131  g\u00f6steriyorum. Bu varsay\u0131mlar\u0131n yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011funu savunuyor, bu varsay\u0131mlar\u0131 terk etti\u011fimizde zihinsel nedensellik ve i\u00e7erik zor probleminin, bili\u015fsel bilimci i\u00e7in ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia ediyorum. Bu varsay\u0131mlar yerine benimsedi\u011fim anti-realizm, bilim felsefesinde yeni mekanistik\u00e7ilik ve bu tezin yeni bir \u00f6nerisi olan Nat\u00fcralistik Tutarl\u0131l\u0131k Kriterini a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yorum. T\u00fcm bu de\u011ferlendirmenin bizi zihnin metafizi\u011fine agnostik, radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131 bir bili\u015fsel bilime y\u00f6neltti\u011fini savunuyorum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bug\u00fcn bili\u015fsel bilime uzaktan bakan biri, muhtemelen olduk\u00e7a par\u00e7al\u0131, b\u00f6l\u00fck p\u00f6r\u00e7\u00fck bir alan g\u00f6recektir. Bu ki\u015fi alan\u0131n teorik yap\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 anlamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ise kabaca bir ayr\u0131m fark edebilir: bir yanda bilgisayar biliminden esinlenen i\u015flemlemeselci (computationalist) yakla\u015f\u0131mlar, di\u011fer yanda biyolojide temellenen bedensel bili\u015f \u00e7er\u00e7eveleri yer al\u0131r. Baz\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rma ekolleri her iki perspektifi birle\u015ftirmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131r ve bu iki ucun aras\u0131nda farkl\u0131 noktalarda konumlanabilir; baz\u0131lar\u0131 ise birbirine keskin bi\u00e7imde z\u0131t, olduk\u00e7a farkl\u0131 noktalarda durur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Farkl\u0131 ekoller aras\u0131ndaki pek \u00e7ok tart\u0131\u015fma, genellikle teorik bir \u00f6\u011fenin (construct), bir varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n veya bir \u00f6nermenin ger\u00e7ek olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 etraf\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fir. \u00d6rne\u011fin, filozoflar ve bili\u015fsel bilimciler zihinsel ya da n\u00f6ral temsillerin ger\u00e7ek olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmaktad\u0131r (Fodor & Pylyshyn, 1981; Thompson & Piccinini, 2018; Piccinini, 2022; Ramsey, 2007; \u015eahin & Deveci, 2023; Van Gelder, 1995). E\u011fer ger\u00e7eklerse, temsillerin do\u011fas\u0131 nedir, nas\u0131ld\u0131r? Temsili i\u00e7erik ger\u00e7ekten var m\u0131d\u0131r (Schulte, 2023)? Zihin ve\/veya beyin ger\u00e7ekten<\/em> bir bilgisayar m\u0131d\u0131r (Chalmers, 2011; Richards vd., 2019)? Zihin\/beynimiz ger\u00e7ekten<\/em> d\u0131\u015far\u0131daki \u015feyleri kodlay\u0131p (encoding) depolamakta (storage) m\u0131d\u0131r (Bickhard & Richie, 1983; Brette, 2018)? Zihnimizde ger\u00e7ekten ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 mod\u00fcller var m\u0131d\u0131r (Carruthers, 2006; Fodor, 1983)? Modellerimizde varsay\u0131lan veya \u00f6nerilen i\u015flemlemelerin (computation) ne kadar\u0131 ger\u00e7ekten<\/em> ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmektedir? \u00d6rne\u011fin, beyinde ger\u00e7ekten<\/em>  ama\u00e7 fonksiyon(lar\u0131) var m\u0131d\u0131r? N\u00f6ronlar\u0131m\u0131z ger\u00e7ekten olas\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemlemekte ya da t\u00fcrev almakta m\u0131d\u0131r (Haefner vd., 2024; Marblestone, Wayne & Kording, 2016; Song vd., 2020; Richards vd., 2019)? T\u00fcm organizmalar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekten eyleyicili\u011fi (agency) var m\u0131d\u0131r, yoksa yaln\u0131zca hayvanlara ya da insanlara m\u0131 \u00f6zg\u00fcd\u00fcr (Moreno & Etxeberria, 2005; Walsh, 2015)? Otopoiesis (autopoiesis) ger\u00e7ek<\/em> midir (Maturana & Varela, 1973\/1980; Varela, 1979)? \u00d6zg\u00fcr irade ger\u00e7ek<\/em> midir (Mitchell, 2023; Sapolsky, 2023)? Bilin\u00e7 ger\u00e7ek<\/em> midir (Dennett, 1991; Frankish, 2016; Seth, 2021)? \u0130\u015fte bu t\u00fcr sorular, farkl\u0131 ekolleri, farkl\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7eveleri, farkl\u0131 ontolojileri birbirinden ay\u0131r\u0131r. Bili\u015fsel bilimciler ve filozoflar\u0131n, bu sorulara verdikleri cevaplara g\u00f6re \u015fu veya bu ekole \u201cait\u201d olduklar\u0131 s\u00f6ylenebilir. \u0130nsanlar genellikle neyin ger\u00e7ek<\/em> oldu\u011funa dair kabullerine g\u00f6re bir \u00e7er\u00e7eveyi di\u011ferine tercih ederler.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bu sorular aras\u0131nda bir tanesi en \u00f6nemli ve en etkili olarak \u00f6ne \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r, zihinsel temsillerin ger\u00e7ek olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve e\u011fer \u00f6yleyse, do\u011falar\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak ne \u2013veya nas\u0131l- oldu\u011fu sorusudur bu. Brentano\u2019dan bu yana temsiller, zihinselli\u011fin do\u011fas\u0131na i\u00e7kin, zihinsel olan\u0131 zihinsel olmayandan ay\u0131ran ba\u015fat unsur olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bili\u015fsel bilimin zihni \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, bu soruya verilen cevaplar, farkl\u0131 ekollerin daha geni\u015f varsay\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131 ve y\u00f6ntemlerini \u015fekillendirmi\u015f, s\u0131kl\u0131kla derin ve k\u00f6kl\u00fc farkl\u0131l\u0131klara yol a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Son d\u00f6nemde Wheeler (2017), as\u0131l tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n temsile dayal\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131mlar ile temsil kar\u015f\u0131tl\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda de\u011fil, i\u00e7selcilik ile d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k aras\u0131nda oldu\u011funu \u00f6ne s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Burada d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u201cbili\u015fsel durum ve s\u00fcre\u00e7lerin maddi (material) ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n (vehicle) (veya arac\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n) beyin, beden ve d\u00fcnyaya da\u011f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu nedenle k\u0131smen bedeni saran derinin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda konumland\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d tezi olarak tan\u0131mlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Wheeler\u2019\u0131 (2017) geni\u015fleten Villalobos ve Silverman (2018), buradaki k\u00f6k nedenin sistematik asimetri<\/em> oldu\u011funu belirtir. Onlara g\u00f6re, radikal enaktivizm (radical enactivism) gibi temsil kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131mlarda bile (Hutto & Myin, 2012), zihinsel\/bili\u015fsel olan\u0131 zihinsel\/bili\u015fsel olmayandan ay\u0131ran bir \u201cbelirte\u00e7 (marker)\u201d \u00f6nermek yayg\u0131n bir tutum olagelmi\u015ftir. Yani bili\u015fi neyin te\u015fkil etti\u011fini yan\u0131tlamak \u00f6ncel olmu\u015ftur. Buna g\u00f6re, hangi fenomenlerin bili\u015fle ilgili oldu\u011funu ve bili\u015fin bunlar\u0131 nas\u0131l \u00fcretti\u011fini ancak bu \u015fekilde, yani \u00f6ncelikle neyin bili\u015fsel neyin bili\u015fsel olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bir tan\u0131m ve g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f kurarak ara\u015ft\u0131rabilir ve \u00f6\u011frenebiliriz, bu fenomenler ister bedensel, isterse i\u015flemlemeselci olsun… Villalobos ve Silverman\u2019a g\u00f6re ise bu, bili\u015fsel olarak kurucu (constitutive) olan \u00f6\u011felerin a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 y\u00fck\u00fc ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kurucu olmayan nedensel etmenlere \u00fcst\u00fcn geldi\u011fi sistematik bir asimetriyle sonu\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu ise, yaln\u0131zca bili\u015fsel olanla bili\u015fsel olmayan aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n yerini de\u011fi\u015ftiren fakat ayr\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcren olas\u0131 i\u00e7selci yorumlara kap\u0131 aralam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Onlara g\u00f6re bu durum bedensel yakla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n tutarl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 zay\u0131flat\u0131r ve onlar\u0131 ele\u015ftirdikleri i\u00e7selci yakla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n getirdi\u011fi potansiyel sorunlara kar\u015f\u0131 savunmas\u0131z b\u0131rakm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bunun \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7mek i\u00e7in g\u00fcvenli ve eksiksiz bir d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k gereklidir. B\u00f6yle bir yakla\u015f\u0131m i\u00e7in temsil kar\u015f\u0131tl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir \u00f6nko\u015ful olsa da tek ba\u015f\u0131na yeterli de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bu tezde, yukar\u0131da \u00f6zetlenen tart\u0131\u015fma dizisinin ad\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131 izleyerek, bilimde ve daha \u00f6zel olarak bili\u015fsel bilimde belirli bir teorik varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n (entity) \u201cger\u00e7ekli\u011fi\u201dnin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n anlaml\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ele alaca\u011f\u0131m. Bu ba\u011flamda ikinci b\u00f6l\u00fcm, bilimsel realizm ve anti-realizm tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131na ayr\u0131lacakt\u0131r. Bilimsel teorilerle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 kalmay\u0131p g\u00fcndelik veya halk aras\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekli\u011fe dair yayg\u0131n varsay\u0131m ve fikirlere de uygulanan radikal bir anti-realizm formu \u00f6nerece\u011fim. Elbette realizmi reddetmek beraberinde \u00e7e\u015fitli sorunsallar getirecektir. \u00d6rne\u011fin, e\u011fer bilimin bize ger\u00e7ekte neyin \u201cvar\u201d oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yledi\u011fi fikrinden vazge\u00e7ersek, teorileri nas\u0131l de\u011ferlendirece\u011fimiz sorusu ilk etapta yan\u0131ts\u0131z g\u00f6r\u00fcnecektir. Bu durumda hangi kavramlar\u0131n kullan\u0131lmaya de\u011fer oldu\u011funa nas\u0131l karar verebiliriz ki? Bu sorular\u0131 ve sorunsallar\u0131 ele almak i\u00e7in ise bilim felsefesinde Yeni Mekanistik\u00e7ilik (New Mechanistic) yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131na y\u00f6nelece\u011fim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, yeni mekanistik\u00e7i yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n bilimi nas\u0131l kavramsalla\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 inceleyece\u011fim. Bunu yaparken, yeni mekanistik\u00e7ili\u011fin geni\u015f ve dar yorumlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda bir ayr\u0131m yapaca\u011f\u0131m. Bu ayr\u0131mda, geni\u015f yoruma g\u00f6re Yeni Mekanistik\u00e7ilik, bilimi b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle a\u00e7\u0131klamay\u0131 ve bilimin nas\u0131l y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi gerekti\u011fine dair normatif bir \u00e7er\u00e7eve sunmay\u0131 ama\u00e7lar. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k dar yorum, onu bilimin t\u00fcm\u00fcne dair evrensel bir \u00e7er\u00e7eve olarak de\u011fil, belli ba\u015fl\u0131 bilim alanlar\u0131 i\u00e7in daha uygun olan alternatif yakla\u015f\u0131mlardan biri olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcr. Bu tez,de bu ayr\u0131m konusunda tarafs\u0131z bir tutum benimseyece\u011fim. Yani benim \u00f6nerdi\u011fim temel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f i\u00e7in bu iki yorumdan hangisinin kabul edildi\u011fi belirleyici olmayacak. Fakat iki yorum a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan da farkl\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131labilece\u011fini teslim edece\u011fim. Ard\u0131ndan, Yeni Mekanistik\u00e7ili\u011fin anti-realizmle uyumlu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusunu ele alaca\u011f\u0131m. Her ne kadar pek \u00e7ok mekanistik\u00e7i filozof realist olsa da, Yeni Mekanistik \u00e7er\u00e7evenin temel varsay\u0131mlar\u0131ndan b\u00f6yle bir zorunluluk \u00e7\u0131kmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunaca\u011f\u0131m. Bu bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131nda \u00f6nemli olan, mekanizmalar\u0131n metafiziksel anlamda \u201cger\u00e7ek\u201d olup olmamas\u0131 de\u011fil, kavramsal ve empirik olarak bilimde tutarl\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar getirmemize imk\u00e2n sa\u011flay\u0131p sa\u011flamad\u0131klar\u0131 olacak.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, bili\u015fsel bilimdeki h\u00e2kim pratikleri inceleyece\u011fim. Bunu yaparken i\u015flevselcili\u011fe odaklanacak ve \u00f6zel bilimlerin otonomisi ile \u00e7oklu ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilirlik (multiple realizability) fikirlerinin etkisi nedeniyle, mevcut t\u00fcm bili\u015fsel bilim ekollerinin -aradaki pek \u00e7ok farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011fa ra\u011fmen- nihayetinde zihin metafizi\u011fine dair taahh\u00fctleri (commitment) bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ayr\u0131\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 savunaca\u011f\u0131m. Hem \u00f6zel bilimlerin otonomisini hem de \u00e7oklu ger\u00e7ekle\u015febilirli\u011fi ele\u015ftirerek, bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerin yeterli temellendirmeden ve gerek\u00e7elendirmeden yoksun oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrece\u011fim. \u0130kinci ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc b\u00f6l\u00fcmlerde geli\u015ftirdi\u011fim tart\u0131\u015fmalara dayanarak, ard\u0131ndan bu tezin temel \u00f6nerisi olarak Kavramsal Tutarl\u0131l\u0131k (Conceptual Coherence \u2013 CC) ve Nat\u00fcralistik Tutarl\u0131l\u0131k (Naturalistic Coherence \u2013 NC) kavramlar\u0131n\u0131 tan\u0131taca\u011f\u0131m. Bunlardan hareketle, bilimde yeni kavramlar \u00f6nerilirken ve mevcut kavramsal \u00e7er\u00e7evelerin de\u011ferlendirilirken kullan\u0131lacak normatif bir \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct olarak Nat\u00fcralistik Tutarl\u0131l\u0131k Kriteri\u2019ni (Naturalistic Coherence Criterion \u2013 NCC) \u00f6nerece\u011fim. Bu kriterin Yeni Mekanistik\u00e7ili\u011fin varsay\u0131mlar\u0131yla birle\u015ftirildi\u011finde, zihne dair metafiziksel taahh\u00fctleri merkeze almayan, onlar\u0131 ikincil ve a posteriori kayg\u0131lar olarak g\u00f6ren bir bili\u015fsel bilim yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131na y\u00f6nlendirdi\u011fini savunaca\u011f\u0131m. Bu iddiay\u0131 desteklemek i\u00e7in, geli\u015fimsel biyolojiden tarihsel bir vaka ile bir d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce deneyine ba\u015fvuraca\u011f\u0131m.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Son b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, yanl\u0131\u015f anla\u015f\u0131lmalar\u0131 \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131yla bu tezin neyi iddia etti\u011fini ve neyi iddia etmedi\u011fini netle\u015ftirece\u011fim. Burada geli\u015ftirilen yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n bili\u015fsel bilimdeki mevcut ekollerden nas\u0131l ayr\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131saca vurgulayacak ve gelecekteki ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar i\u00e7in olas\u0131 y\u00f6nelimleri belirleyece\u011fim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bu tez ile, radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131 bir bili\u015fsel bilimin gereklili\u011fini ve ana hatlar\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymay\u0131 ama\u00e7l\u0131yorum. Burada kastetti\u011fim, zihne i\u00e7kin hi\u00e7bir at\u0131fta bulunmayan, zihin metafizi\u011fi konusunda b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle agnostik kalan ve bu anlamda \u201cd\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131\u201d olan bir yakla\u015f\u0131m. Do\u011frusu, b\u00f6ylesine radikal bir d\u0131\u015fsall\u0131k d\u00fczeyinde, i\u00e7selcili\u011fe hi\u00e7 bir yer kalm\u0131yor olabilir, \u00f6yle ki bu \u00e7er\u00e7eve a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan i\u00e7sel ile d\u0131\u015fsal aras\u0131ndaki ayr\u0131m\u0131n kendisi \u00e7\u00f6ker ve anlams\u0131zla\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Fakat bu \u2018d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k\u2019 isimlendirmesi, bana g\u00f6re, h\u00e2l\u00e2 elveri\u015fli ve kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131d\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda, savundu\u011fum g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn konumunu netle\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in i\u00e7selcilik\u2013d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k spektrumuna bir \u00f6rnek vermek faydal\u0131 olabilir. Bu spektrumun bir ucunda en i\u00e7selci yakla\u015f\u0131m olarak fenomenoloji, di\u011fer ucunda ise radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131 konum yer almaktad\u0131r. Bu, fenomenolojinin zihni \u201ckafatas\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7inde\u201d konumland\u0131rma veya onu yaln\u0131zca beyinle ili\u015fkilendirme gibi taaah\u00fctlerde bulunmas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 de\u011fildir. Asl\u0131nda tam aksine, fenomenolojik gelenek b\u00f6yle taahh\u00fctlerden \u00f6zellikle ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131r. Onu i\u00e7selci kutupta konumland\u0131ran \u015fey, y\u00f6ntemsel y\u00f6nelimidir. Fenomenoloji zihinselli\u011fi, y\u00f6nelimselli\u011fi (intentionality) ve birinci-ki\u015fi deneyimini analizin ve incelemenin birincil oda\u011f\u0131na koyar ve bunlar\u0131 uzay-zamansal s\u00fcre\u00e7lere indirgemeye direnir. Buna fenomenolojinin i\u00e7lemselci (intensionalist) stratejisi denebilir. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131kta \u201cradikal\u201d k\u0131lan \u015fey zihinseli do\u011frudan uzay-zamansal s\u00fcre\u00e7lere indirgemesi de\u011fildir. O da zihinseli bu terimlerle temellendirmekten ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131r ve bu konuda tamamen agnostik bir tutum sergiler. Fakat bunu, oda\u011f\u0131 b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle zihinsel olgulardan uzakla\u015ft\u0131ran kaplamsalc\u0131 (extensionalist) bir y\u00f6ntemle yapar. Yani ben burada radikal d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131ktan s\u00f6z etti\u011fimde, ayn\u0131 zamanda i\u00e7selcilik\u2013d\u0131\u015fsalc\u0131l\u0131k spektrumunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri de\u011ferlendirmek ve konumland\u0131rmak i\u00e7in y\u00f6ntemsel bir kriter olarak i\u00e7lemsel\u2013kaplamsal ayr\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 da dikkate almaktay\u0131m. Bu eksen, yakla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131 yaln\u0131zca zihni nereye konumlad\u0131klar\u0131na g\u00f6re de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda zihinsel kavramlar\u0131n bilimsel ara\u015ft\u0131rmadaki stat\u00fc ve a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 rol\u00fcn\u00fc nas\u0131l ele ald\u0131klar\u0131na g\u00f6re de ay\u0131r\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kaynak\u00e7a<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bickhard, M. H., & Richie, D. M. (1983). On the nature of representation: A case study of James Gibson’s theory of perception. Praeger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Brette, R. (2018). Is coding a relevant metaphor for the brain? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, e215. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/S0140525X19000049<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Carruthers, P. (2006). The case for massively modular models of mind. In R. Stainton (Ed.), Contemporary debates in cognitive science. Wiley-Blackwell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chalmers, D. (2011). A computational foundation for the study of cognition. Journal of Cognitive Science, 12(4), 323\u2013357.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Penguin Books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981). How direct is visual perception? Some reflections on Gibson’s “ecological approach.” Cognition, 9(2), 139\u2013196. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/0010-0277(81)90009-3<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Frankish, K. (2016). Illusionism as a theory of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 23(11\u201312), 11\u201339.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Haefner, R. M., Beck, J., Savin, C., Salmasi, M., & Pitkow, X. (2024). How does the brain compute with probabilities? arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.02709. https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2409.02709<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hutto, D. D., & Myin, E. (2013). Radicalizing enactivism: Basic minds without content. Boston Review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Marblestone, A. H., Wayne, G., & Kording, K. P. (2016). Toward an integration of deep learning and neuroscience. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 10, 94. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fncom.2016.00094<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1973\/1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Springer<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mitchell, K. J. (2023). Free agents: How evolution gave us free will. Princeton University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreno, A., & Etxeberria, A. (2005). Agency in natural and artificial systems. Artificial Life, 11, 161\u2013175. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1162\/1064546053278919<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Piccinini, G. (2022). Situated Neural Representations: Solving the Problems of Content. Frontiers in Neurorobotics. 16:846979. doi: 10.3389\/fnbot.2022.846979<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ramsey, W. M. (2007). Representation reconsidered. Cambridge University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Richards, B. A., Lillicrap, T. P., Beaudoin, P., Bengio, Y., Bogacz, R., Christensen, A., … & Kording, K. P. (2019). A deep learning framework for neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience, 22(11), 1761\u20131770. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41593-019-0520-2<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u015eahin, Y., & Deveci, I. E. (2023, May 7). Against representations that do not represent: Reply to Thomson and Piccinini [Poster presentation]. 9th International Symposium on Brain and Cognitive Science, \u00d6zye\u011fin University, Istanbul, Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sapolsky, R. (2023). Determined: A science of life without free will. Penguin Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Schulte, P. (2023). Mental content. Cambridge University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Seth, A. (2021). Being you: A new science of consciousness. Faber & Faber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Song, Y., Lukasiewicz, T., Xu, Z., & Bogacz, R. (2020). Can the brain do backpropagation? Exact implementation of backpropagation in predictive coding networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 22566\u201322579.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thomson, E., & Piccinini, G. (2018). Neural representations observed. Minds and Machines: Journal for Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy and Cognitive Science, 28(1), 191\u2013235. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11023-018-9459-4<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Van Gelder, T. (1995). What might cognition be, if not computation? Journal of Philosophy, 92(7), 345\u2013381.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Varela, F. J. (1979). Principles of biological autonomy. North-Holland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Villalobos, M., & Silverman, D. (2018). Extended functionalism, radical enactivism, and the autopoietic theory of cognition: Prospects for a full revolution in cognitive science. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 17(4), 719\u2013739. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11097-017-9542-y<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Walsh, D. (2015). Organisms, agency, and evolution. Cambridge University Press. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/CBO9781316402719<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wheeler, M. (2017). The revolution will not be optimised: Radical enactivism, extended functionalism and the extensive mind. Topoi, 36(3), 457\u2013472.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":4572,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false},"event_publishing_tags":[84,83,286,97,98,94,766,91,93,262,234,63,101,393,82,816,691,64,90,233,92,323,285,370,369,74,828,77,1155,826,274,273,76,66,65,300,390,275,482,75,394,765,261,177,299,351,726,80,81,100,471,770,61,1154,96,176,184,1156,825],"kategori":[725],"class_list":["post-4567","blog_content","type-blog_content","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","event_publishing_tags-artificial-intelligence","event_publishing_tags-beyin","event_publishing_tags-bilgisayar-bilimi","event_publishing_tags-bilim","event_publishing_tags-bilim-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-bilis","event_publishing_tags-bilis-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-bilissel","event_publishing_tags-bilissel-bilim","event_publishing_tags-bilissel-bilim-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-bilissel-psikoloji","event_publishing_tags-biology","event_publishing_tags-biyoloji","event_publishing_tags-biyoloji-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-brain","event_publishing_tags-chinese-room","event_publishing_tags-cogist","event_publishing_tags-cognition","event_publishing_tags-cognitive","event_publishing_tags-cognitive-psychology","event_publishing_tags-cognitive-science","event_publishing_tags-cogsci","event_publishing_tags-computer-science","event_publishing_tags-evolution","event_publishing_tags-evrim","event_publishing_tags-felsefe","event_publishing_tags-intentionality","event_publishing_tags-mental","event_publishing_tags-mental-content","event_publishing_tags-mental-representation","event_publishing_tags-metafizik","event_publishing_tags-metaphysics","event_publishing_tags-mind","event_publishing_tags-neuroscience","event_publishing_tags-norobilim","event_publishing_tags-norobilim-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-ontology","event_publishing_tags-ontoloji","event_publishing_tags-philmind","event_publishing_tags-philosophy","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-biology","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-cognition","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-cognitive-science","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-mind","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-neuroscience","event_publishing_tags-philosophy-of-science","event_publishing_tags-philsci","event_publishing_tags-psikoloji","event_publishing_tags-psychology","event_publishing_tags-science","event_publishing_tags-sinirbilim","event_publishing_tags-sinirbilim-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-yapay-zeka","event_publishing_tags-yonelimsellik","event_publishing_tags-zihin","event_publishing_tags-zihin-felsefesi","event_publishing_tags-zihinsel","event_publishing_tags-zihinsel-icerik","event_publishing_tags-zihinsel-temsil","kategori-yazi"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog_content\/4567","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog_content"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/blog_content"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog_content\/4567\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4901,"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog_content\/4567\/revisions\/4901"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4572"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4567"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"event_publishing_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/event_publishing_tags?post=4567"},{"taxonomy":"kategori","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cog-ist.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kategori?post=4567"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}