University of Wollongong
Browse

Knowing what? Radical versus conservative enactivism

Download (221.32 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2024-11-14, 16:36 authored by Daniel HuttoDaniel Hutto
The binary divide between traditional cognitivist and enactivist paradigms is tied to their respective commitments to understanding cognition as based on knowing that as opposed to knowing how. Using O’Regan’s and Noe’s landmark sensorimotor contingency theory of perceptual experience as a foil, I demonstrate how easy it is to fall into conservative thinking. Although their account is advertised as decidedly ‘skill-based’, on close inspection it shows itself to be riddled with suppositions threatening to reduce it to a rules-and-representations approach. To remain properly enactivist it must be purged of such commitments and indeed all commitment to mediating knowledge: it must embrace a more radical enactivism.

History

Citation

Hutto, D. D. (2005). Knowing what? Radical versus conservative enactivism. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4 (4), 389-405.

Journal title

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences

Volume

4

Issue

4

Pagination

389-405

Language

English

RIS ID

80477

Usage metrics

    Categories

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC