Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec 6:9:2393.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02393. eCollection 2018.

From Wide Cognition to Mechanisms: A Silent Revolution

Affiliations

From Wide Cognition to Mechanisms: A Silent Revolution

Marcin Miłkowski et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that several recent 'wide' perspectives on cognition (embodied, embedded, extended, enactive, and distributed) are only partially relevant to the study of cognition. While these wide accounts override traditional methodological individualism, the study of cognition has already progressed beyond these proposed perspectives toward building integrated explanations of the mechanisms involved, including not only internal submechanisms but also interactions with others, groups, cognitive artifacts, and their environment. Wide perspectives are essentially research heuristics for building mechanistic explanations. The claim is substantiated with reference to recent developments in the study of "mindreading" and debates on emotions. We argue that the current practice in cognitive (neuro)science has undergone, in effect, a silent mechanistic revolution, and has turned from initial binary oppositions and abstract proposals toward the integration of wide perspectives with the rest of the cognitive (neuro)sciences.

Keywords: distributed cognition; embodied cognition; enactivism; extended mind; grounded cognition; mechanistic explanation; scaffolded mind; wide mechanism.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Wide approaches to the study of cognition.

References

    1. Abramova E., Slors M. (2018). Mechanistic explanation for enactive sociality. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 1–24. 10.1007/s11097-018-9577-8 - DOI
    1. Agre P., Chapman D. (1987). “Pengi: an implementation of a theory of activity,” in Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-87), eds Forbus K., Shrobe H. (Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; ), 268–272.
    1. Aizawa K., Gillett C. (2011). “The autonomy of psychology in the age of neuroscience,” in Causality in the Sciences Vol. 6 eds Illari P. M., Russo F., Williamson J. (Oxford: Oxford University Press; ),202–223.
    1. Anderson M. L. (2015). “Beyond componential constitution in the brain: starburst amacrine cells and enabling constraints,” in Open MIND, eds Metzinger T. K., Windt J. M. (Frankfurt: MIND Group; ).
    1. Baetu T. M. (2015). The completeness of mechanistic explanations. Philos. Sci. 82 775–786. 10.1086/683279 - DOI