Synthese 198 (Suppl 17):4007-4026 (2019)
AbstractWhat are the affordances of artifacts? One view is that the affordances of artifacts, just as the affordances of natural objects, pertain to possible ways in which they can be manipulated. Another view maintains that, given that artifacts are sociocultural objects, their affordances pertain primarily to their culturally-derived function. Whereas some have tried to provide a unifying notion of affordance to capture both aspects, here I argue that they should be kept separate. In this paper, I introduce a distinction between standard affordances, which concern the function of artifacts, and ad-hoc affordances, which refer to how artifacts are manipulated. I then argue for the neuropsychological plausibility of such a distinction, linking it to the dissociation between function knowledge and manipulation knowledge. Finally, I defend the equal status of these forms of knowledge and, hence, of standard and ad-hoc affordances, and I show that this has some implications for the debate on the role of motor processes in the conceptual knowledge of artifacts.
Similar books and articles
Canonical affordances in context.Alan Costall - 2012 - Avant: Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies 3 (2):85-93.
The relation between interaction aesthetics and affordances.Ioannis Xenakis & Argyris Arnellos - 2013 - Design Studies 34 (1).
Can Affordances Explain Behavior?Alexandros Tillas, Gottfried Vosgerau, Tim Seuchter & Silvano Zipoli Caiani - 2017 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 8 (2):295-315.
The shrinking difference between artifacts and natural objects.Lynne Rudder Baker - 2008 - American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers.
Are affordances normative?Manuel Heras-Escribano & Manuel de Pinedo - 2016 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 15 (4):565-589.
Are affordances normative?Manuel Pinedo & Manuel Heras-Escribano - 2016 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 15 (4):565-589.
Affordances and the body: An intentional analysis of Gibson's ecological approach to visual perception.Harry Heft - 1989 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 19 (1):1–30.
Social affordances in context: What is it that we are bodily responsive to.Erik Rietveld, Sanneke de Haan & Damiaan Denys - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (4):436-436.
Super Artifacts: Personal Devices as Intrinsically Multifunctional, Meta-representational Artifacts with a Highly Variable Structure.Marco Fasoli - 2018 - Minds and Machines 28 (3):589-604.
Representing Our Options: The Perception of Affordance for Bodily and Mental Action.T. McClelland - 2019 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 26 (3-4):155-180.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
How Do Technological Artefacts Embody Moral Values?Michael Klenk - 2021 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (3):525-544.
Deontic artifacts. Investigating the normativity of objects.Giuseppe Lorini, Stefano Moroni & Olimpia Giuliana Loddo - 2021 - Philosophical Explorations 24 (2):185-203.
Between vision and action: introduction to the special issue.Gabriele Ferretti & Silvano Zipoli Caiani - 2019 - Synthese 198 (Suppl 17):3899-3911.
Institutions and other things: critical hermeneutics, postphenomenology and material engagement theory.Tailer G. Ransom & Shaun Gallagher - forthcoming - AI and Society.
Affordances and their ontological core.Fumiaki Toyoshima, Adrien Barton & Jean-François Ethier - 2022 - Applied ontology 17 (2):285-320.
References found in this work
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition.James J. Gibson - 1979 - Houghton Mifflin.
Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 1984 - Behaviorism 14 (1):51-56.
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.Marc H. Bornstein - 1980 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 39 (2):203-206.
Perceptual symbol systems.Lawrence W. Barsalou - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (4):577-660.