Graduate studies at Western
Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy 1996 (Spring) (1996)
|Abstract||Cognitive science is ready for a major reconceptualization. This is not at all because efforts by its practitioners have failed, but rather because so much progress has been made. The need for reconceptualization arises from the fact that this progress has come at greater cost than necessary, largely because of more or less philosophical (at least metatheoretical) straightjackets still worn - whether wittingly or not - by those doing the work. These bonds are extremely hard to break. Even some of those who have directed powerful arguments against them have failed entirely to shake them off. The bonds are often attributed to the work of René Descartes, but they are really much older than that. If even in the present effort, I fail entirely to remove the straightjacket myself (even though I am making every attempt to get it off), this will testify to its tight grip. The straightjacket I am thinking about, of course, is the vague picture of the human situation that imagines centralized, internal minds in control of bodily machines. While almost no one in the contemporary cognitive science arena imagines minds to be the kind of thing Descartes took them to be - instantiations of a unique, fully non-material substance - there is nevertheless a deep resistance, even among the most fervent professed "materialists," to giving up this picture. In what follows, I shall try to offer an approach which on the one hand capitalizes on the excellent progress that has been made in cognitive science in the last few decades, and which on the other hand offers a general approach that may help at some level in the attempt to shake "Cartesian" bonds. The approach, as the alert reader already knows from the title of the essay, is an "ecological" approach.|
|Keywords||ecological cartesianism cognitive science|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Rob Withagen & Claire F. Michaels (1999). An Ecological Approach to Cognitive (Im)Penetrability. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (3):399-400.
Edwin Hutchins (2010). Cognitive Ecology. Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (4):705-715.
Bryan G. Norton (2008). Beyond Positivist Ecology: Toward an Integrated Ecological Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (4):581-592.
Evan Thompson (1995). Colour Vision: A Study in Cognitive Science and the Philosophy of Perception. New York: Routledge.
Ronald N. Giere (1990). Implications of the Cognitive Sciences for the Philosophy of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:419 - 430.
Kevin de Laplante (2004). Environmental Alchemy: How to Turn Ecological Science Into Ecological Philosophy. Environmental Ethics 26 (4):361-380.
Andrew Howes (2012). Useful Theories Make Predictions. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):84-86.
James S. Boster (2012). Cognitive Anthropology Is a Cognitive Science. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (3):372-378.
Joel Walmsley (2008). Explanation in Dynamical Cognitive Science. Minds and Machines 18 (3):331-348.
T. Ziemke (2011). Realism Redux: Gibson's Affordances Get a Well-Deserved Update. Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):87-89.
Paul Thagard (2009). Why Cognitive Science Needs Philosophy and Vice Versa. Topics in Cognitive Science 1 (2):237-254.
Anthony Chemero (2003). Information for Perception and Information Processing. Minds and Machines 13 (4):577-588.
Nigel Stepp, Anthony Chemero & Michael T. Turvey (2011). Philosophy for the Rest of Cognitive Science. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):425-437.
Backsansky Oleg E. (2008). Rethinking Epistemology, Philosophy of Science and Technology. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 53:335-342.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads42 ( #31,744 of 738,241 )
Recent downloads (6 months)17 ( #7,594 of 738,241 )
How can I increase my downloads?