Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
One of the liveliest debates about cognition concerns whether our cognition sometimes extends beyond our brains and bodies. One party says Yes, another No. This paper shows that debate between these parties has been epistemologically confused and requires reorienting. Both parties frequently appeal to empirical considerations and to extra-empirical theoretical virtues to support claims about where cognition is. These things should constrain their claims, but cannot do all the work hoped. This is because of the overlooked fact, uncovered in this paper, that we could never distinguish the rival views empirically or by typical theoretical virtues. I show this by drawing on recent work on testing, predictive accuracy, and theoretical virtues. The recommendation to emerge is that we step back from debate about where cognition is, to the epistemology of what cognition is. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2010 | 10.1016/j.cogsys.2010.05.001 | Cognitive Systems Research |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
theoretical virtue,situated cognition,extended cognition,liveliest debate,typical theoretical virtue,individuation,predictive accuracy,recent work,cognition concern,extended mind,empirical consideration,empirical test,rival views empirically | Situated cognition,Appeal,Cognitive science,Psychology,Embodied cognition,Individuation,Cognition,Epistemology,Extended cognition,Empirical research | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
11 | 4 | Cognitive Systems Research |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.37 | 2 |
Authors | ||
1 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew J. Barker | 1 | 1 | 0.37 |