Cognitive science as the computational neuroethology of intelligent behavior: Why biological facts are important for explaining intelligent behavior

Are the details and facts of biology important to Cognitive Science (CogSci)? Whether biological facts, for example, neurobiological facts, are important to CogSci is a controversial issue. On one side of this debate are those (e.g., Fodor, Putnam, Pylyshyn) who argue that psychology is independent of neural considerations. They contend that arguments for functionalism in the philosophy of mind show that higher level, "special" sciences, such as psychology, are independent of implementation level sciences, such as neurobiology. On the other side of this debate are those (e.g., the Churchlands, Andy Clark, Lycan) who argue that psychology and neurobiology must coevolve; these sciences proceed through a process of mutual epistemic interaction. They argue that psychology should be open to revision on the basis of neurobiological discoveries, and vice versa.;This thesis takes the second side of this debate. I defend a philosophical position--taken from a short discussion by Andy Clark--called microfunctionalism. Microfunctionalism attempts to show how multiple levels of science can interact in a mutually beneficial fashion. Microfunctionalism is a species of traditional, philosophy of mind functionalism, but one that avoids traditional functionalist conclusions concerning the autonomy of higher level sciences. In its strongest form, microfunctionalism holds that sciences at all levels--psychological, social, neural--are necessary for proper theorizing within CogSci, but that none on its own is sufficient. Multiple levels of inquiry produce a large breadth of evidence that acts in a mutually constraining fashion.;I augment the philosophical discussion and arguments for microfunctionalism with concrete examples and lessons drawn from the science of neuroethology. Neuroethology is the subfield of biology concerned with the neural basis of naturally occurring animal behavior. Paradigmatic neuroethological models include echolocation in bats, vocalization in primates, and the electrical sensory modality of certain teleost fish and sharks. Neuroethology represents a highly successful approach to understanding animal behavior that makes simultaneous use of data generated at a variety of levels of investigation. I show that microfunctionalism is consistent with the kinds of interdisciplinary interactions that occur within neuroethology.