Avant, Vol. XI, No. 2, doi: 10.26913/avant.2020.02.02
published under license CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Zsuzsanna Kondor 
Institute for Philosophical Research
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
kondorzs @ gmail.com
Received 30 August 2018; accepted 16 July 2019; published Online First 6 January 2020
Abstract: In the present paper, I will investigate how consciousness studies and theories of social cognition relate to each other, and suggest that despite the results of scientific research, both social cognition and consciousness can be better understood within a wider framework, i.e., not exclusively in terms of intra-cranial processes. I will attempt to illuminate the advantages of embracing embodied cognition in contrast with focusing exclusively on neural and/or representational mechanisms when consciousness and cognition are in question. In my argumentation, I will first show the divergence of consciousness- and cognitive-theories on the one hand, and delineate attempts to reconcile these two branches of investigation, on the other hand. Then I will relate the model of cognitive phylogeny, as regards social cognition, and the models of the evolution of consciousness as it emerged in scientific literature. In conclusion, I will attempt to expose the advantages of widening the horizon of investigation towards embodied and enacted cognition.
Keywords: consciousness; social cognition; social brain; embodiment; enactivism
References
| Adolphs, R. (2007). Consciousness: Situated and Social. in Zelazo, P. D., Moscovitch, M. and Thompson, E. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness, (pp. 863-878). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816789.031 |
||||
| Aizawa, K. (2015). What is this cognition that is supposed to be embodied? Philosophical Psychol-ogy 28 (6), 755-775, online available at: http://cepa.info/3949. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2013.875280 |
||||
| Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8367.001.0001 |
||||
| De Jaeger, H., Di Paolo, E. and Gallagher, S. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(10), 441-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.06.009 |
||||
| Dehaene, S. (2014). Consciousness and the brain. Deciphering how the brain codes our thoughts. New York: Viking/Penguin Group. | ||||
| Dennett, D. (1980). The Milk of Human Intentionality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3(3), 428-430. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0000580X |
||||
| Dennett, D. (1995). The Unimagined Preposterousness of Zombies. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(4), 322-326. | ||||
| Descartes, R. ([1644] 1985). The World or Treatise on Light. in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Vol. I. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. | ||||
| Descartes ([1661] 1995). Mediattions on First Philosophy. in The Philosophical Writings of Des-cartes, [1-62]. Vol.II. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. | ||||
| Donald, M. ([1991] 1993). Origins of the Modern Mind. Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. | ||||
| Dunbar, R. I. M. (1998). The Social Brain Hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology. 6 (5), 178-190. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)6:5<178::AID-EVAN5>3.0.CO;2-8 |
||||
| Fiebich, A., Gallagher, S and Hutto, D. D. (2016). Pluralism, Interaction, and the Ontogeny of Social Cognition. in Kiverstein, J. (Ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of the Social Mind. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd. | ||||
| Graziano, M.S.A. & Kastner, S. (2011). Human consciousness and its relationship to social neuro-science: A novel hypothesis. Cognitive Neuroscience, 2(2), 98-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2011.565121 |
||||
| Graziano, M.S.A. (2014). Speculations on the Evolution of Awareness. Journal of Cognitive Neu-roscience, 26(6), 1300-1304. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00623 |
||||
| Heidegger, M. ([1927]1962). Being and Time. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. | ||||
| Humphrey, N. (2000). How to Solve the Mind-Body Problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 7 (4), 5-20 | ||||
| Humphrey, N. (2008). Seeing Red. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. | ||||
| James, W. (1884). What is Emotion? Mind, 9, (34), 188-205. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/os-IX.34.188 |
||||
| James, W. ([1904] 1987). Does ‘consciousness’ exist? In James, William James: Writings 1902-1910 (pp. 1141-1158). New York: Library Classics of the United States. | ||||
| James, W. ([1890] 1932). The principles of psychology: Vol. I. New York: Henry Holt and Com-pany. | ||||
| Kiverstein, J. (2016). The Interdependence of Embodied Cognition and Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness, 23(5-6), 105-137. | ||||
| Kondor, Z. (2003). Changing Media: Perennial Challenge for Philosophy. in Nyíri, K. (Ed.), Mobile Learning. Essays on Philosophy,Psychology and Education, (pp. 69-79) Vienna: Passagen Verlag. | ||||
| Kondor, Z. (2006). Being Mobile: Cognitive Multiplicity. in Nyíri, K. (Ed.), Mobile Understanding. The Epistemology of Ubiquitous Communication, (pp. 79-90), Vienna: Passagen Verlag. | ||||
| Kondor, Z. (2015). Theoretical Controversies – Terminological Biases: Consciousness Revisited. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 41 (54), 143-160. https://doi.org/10.1515/slgr-2015-0025 |
||||
| Locke, J. ([1690] 1999). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Pennsylvania State University, Electronic Classics Series. | ||||
| Malfouris, L. (2007). Before and Beyond Representation: Towards an Enactive Conception of the Palaeolithic Image. in Renfrew, C. and Morley, I. (Eds.) Image and imagination: A Global Prehistory of Figurative Representation (pp. 289-302). Cambridge: McDonald Institute of Ar-chaeological Research,. | ||||
| Malafouris, L. (2010). Metaplasticity and the human becoming: principles of neuroarchaeology. Journal of Anthropological Sciences, 88 (4), 49-72. | ||||
| Malafouris, L. (2013). How Things Shape the Mind. A Theory of Material Engagement. London: The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9476.001.0001 |
||||
| Matlin, M. W. (2013). Cognition. Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. | ||||
| Merleau-Ponty, M. ([1942] 1967). The structure of behavior. Boston: Beacon Press | ||||
| Merleau-Ponty, M. ([1945] 2005). Phenomenology of perception. London, UK: Routledge. | ||||
| Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception. Evanston: Northwestern Univ. Press. | ||||
| Nardi, B. A. (1996). Concepts of Cognition and Consciousness: Four Voices. in B. A. Nardi (Ed.) Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 64-79). Cambridge: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2137.001.0001 |
||||
| O’Regan, K. (2011).Why red doesn’t sound like a bell? Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press. | ||||
| Schmal, D., (2012) A kezdet nélküli kezdet. Descartes és a kartezianizmus problémája. Budapest: Gondolat. | ||||
| Silberstein, M. & Chemero, A. (2012). Complexity and extended phenomenological-cognitive systems. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(1), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01168.x |
||||
| Sperry, R. W. (1969). A Modified Concept of Consiousness. Psychological Review, 76 (6), 532-536 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028156 |
||||
| Thiel, U. (1991). Cudworth and Seventeenth-Century Theories of Consciousness. In Gaukroger, S. (Ed.), The Uses of Antiquity. The Scientific Revolution and the Classical Tradition, (pp. 79-99). Dordrecht: Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3412-5_4 |
||||
| Van Gelder, T. (1999). Wooden Iron? Husserlian Phenomenology Meets Cognitive Science, in J. Petotot, F.J. Varela, B. Pachoud (eds), Naturalizing Phenomenology. Issues in Contemporary Phenomenology and Cognitive Science. (pp. 245 – 265). Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press. | ||||
Wittgenstein, L. (1958). The Blue and Brown Books. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
“Avant” journal – the task financed under the contract 711/P-DUN/2019 from the funds of the Minister of Science and Higher Education for the dissemination of science.Czasopismo „Avant” – zadanie finansowane w ramach umowy 711/P-DUN/2019 ze środków Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.
|
||||
