Mirror systems and simulation: a neo-empiricist interpretation
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 11 (4):565-582 (2012)
| Abstract | It is often claimed that the discovery of mirror neurons supports simulation theory (ST). There has been much controversy about this, however, as there are various competing models of the functional contribution of mirror systems, only some of which characterize mirroring as simulation in the sense required by ST. But a brief review of these models reveals that they all include simulation in some sense . In this paper, I propose that the broader conception of simulation articulated by neo-empiricist theories of concepts can subsume the more specific conceptions of simulation presented by ST and by these other models, thereby offering a framework in which each of these models may play a role. According to neo-empiricism, conceptual thought in general involves simulation in the sense that it is grounded in sensory, motor, and other embodied systems (Barsalou, Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 22 , 577–609, 1999 , Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences , 364 , 1281–1289, 2009 ; Barsalou et al., Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 7 (2), 84–91, 2003 ; Prinz 2002 , Mind & Language , 25 (5), 612–621, 2010 ; Glenberg and Robertson, Journal of Memory and Language , 43 , 379–401, 2000 ). Crucially, the term “simulation” here refers not to simulations of a target agent’s experience in the sense endorsed by simulation theory but to the activation of sensory, motor, affective, and introspective representations. This difference does not entail that neo-empiricism must be in competition with ST—indeed, I will propose that ST can be embedded as a special case within neo-empiricism | |||||||||
| Keywords | Embodied Cognition Mirror Neurons Neo-Empiricism Social Cognition Concepts | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,672 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesShannon Spaulding (2012). Mirror Neurons Are Not Evidence for the Simulation Theory. Synthese 189 (3):515-534.
Vittorio Gallese & Corrado Sinigaglia (2011). What is so Special About Embodied Simulation? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15 (11):512-519.
Mitchell Herschbach (2012). Mirroring Versus Simulation: On the Representational Function of Simulation. Synthese 189 (3):483-513.
John Michael (2011). Four Models of the Functional Contribution of Mirror Systems. Philosophical Explorations 14 (2):185 - 194.
Emma Borg (2007). If Mirror Neurons Are the Answer, What Was the Question? Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (8):5-19.
Shannon Spaulding (2013). Mirror Neurons and Social Cognition. Mind and Language 28 (2):233-257.
Edouard Machery (2006). Two Dogmas of Neo-Empiricism. Philosophy Compass 1 (4):398–412.
Vittorio Gallese (2007). Before and Below 'Theory of Mind': Embodied Simulation and the Neural Correlates of Social Cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 362 (1480):659-669.
Shaun Gallagher (2007). Simulation Trouble. Social Neuroscience.
Lawrence Shapiro (2009). Making Sense of Mirror Neurons. Synthese 167 (3):439 - 456.
Shannon Spaulding (2011). A Critique of Embodied Simulation. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (3):579-599.
Alvin I. Goldman & Chandra S. Sripada (2005). Simulationist Models of Face-Based Emotion Recognition. Cognition 94 (3):193-213.
Guy Dove (2010). Another Heterogeneity Hypothesis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2/3):209-210.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-01-28Total downloads17 ( #71,063 of 549,067 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,067 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
