Neo-pragmatic intentionality and enactive perception: a compromise between extended and enactive minds
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (4):499-519 (2011)
|Abstract||The general idea of enactive perception is that actual and potential embodied activities determine perceptual experience. Some extended mind theorists, such as Andy Clark, refute this claim despite their general emphasis on the importance of the body. I propose a compromise to this opposition. The extended mind thesis is allegedly a consequence of our commonsense understanding of the mind. Furthermore, extended mind theorists assume the existence of non-human minds. I explore the precise nature of the commonsense understanding of the mind, which accepts both extended minds and non-human minds. In the area of philosophy of mind, there are two theories of intentionality based on such commonsense understandings: neo-behaviorism defended, e.g., by Daniel Dennett, and neo-pragmatism advocated, e.g., by Robert Brandom. Neither account is in full agreement with how people ordinarily use their commonsense understanding. Neo-pragmatism, however, can overcome its problem—its inability to explain why people routinely find intentionality in non-humans—by incorporating the phenomenological suggestion that interactional bodily skills determine how we perceive others’ intentionality. I call this integrative position embodied neo-pragmatism . I conclude that the extended view of the mind makes sense, without denying the existence of non-human minds, only by assuming embodied neo-pragmatism and hence the general idea of enactive perception|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
N. Gangopadhyay & L. Schilbach (2011). Seeing Minds: A Neurophilosophical Investigation of the Role of Perception-Action Coupling in Social Perception. Social Neuroscience.
Shaun Gallagher & Katsunori Miyahara (2012). Neo-Pragmatism and Enactive Intentionality. In Jay Schulkin (ed.), New Directions in Philosophy and Cognitive Science: Adaptation and Cephalic Expression. Palgrave Macmillan.
Evan Thompson & Mog Stapleton (2009). Making Sense of Sense-Making: Reflections on Enactive and Extended Mind Theories. Topoi 28 (1):23-30.
Ezequiel Di Paolo (2009). Extended Life. Topoi 28 (1):9-21.
Robert A. Wilson (2010). Extended Vision. In Nivedita Gangopadhyay, Michael Madary & Finn Spicer (eds.), Perception, Action and Consciousness. Oxford University Press..
Dave Ward & Mog Stapleton (2012). Es Are Good. Cognition as Enacted, Embodied, Embedded, Affective and Extended. In Fabio Paglieri (ed.), Consciousness in Interaction: The role of the natural and social context in shaping consciousness.
Nivedita Gangopadhyay (2011). The Extended Mind: Born to Be Wild? A Lesson From Action-Understanding. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (3):377-397.
Eric T. Olson (2011). The Extended Self. Minds and Machines 21 (4):481-495.
Georg Theiner (2008). From Extended Minds to Group Minds: Rethinking the Boundaries of the Mental. Dissertation, Indiana University
Shaun Gallagher (2008). Intersubjectivity in Perception. Continental Philosophy Review 41 (2):163-178.
William E. S. McNeill (2012). Embodiment and the Perceptual Hypothesis. Philosophical Quarterly 62 (247):n/a-n/a.
Tom Roberts (2012). Exploring Enactive Realism. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (2):239-254.
Katalin Farkas (2012). Two Versions of the Extended Mind Thesis. Philosophia 40 (3):435-447.
Stephen Hetherington (2012). The Extended Knower. Philosophical Explorations 15 (2):207 - 218.
Added to index2011-07-12
Total downloads40 ( #29,483 of 556,909 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,931 of 556,909 )
How can I increase my downloads?