Philosophy and Psychology L6: Embodied cognition, Interaction Theory

embodied cognition= how the body shapes the minds

- body plays an imoortant role in the production of behavior

- but the body also constraints and structures our cognitive capacities

ex: upright posture - requires consciousness, introduces new complexities to brain structure

ex2: visual perception: herbivores - eyes on the side, predators - eyes foward

situated cognition = knowing is inseperable from doing, all knowledge is situated in activity bound to social, cultural and physical context

embedded embodied cognition = cognition is constituted by direct interaction between body and environment

functionalist extended embodied cognition= the causal roles that define our mental states are realized by brain, body and environment

ex: Otto has Alzheimer and recalls directions to the museum from his notebook

parity principle = if the world functions as a process of another mental process then it is part of the cognitive process

- environment can be part of the mind

complementary principle = it is not about functional similarity, but about integration between internal and external processes

Ex: Otto's notebook is a part of his mind because it is systematically and reciprocally integrated in his brain during various processes of cognition - not because it functions as Otto's old memory

Radical embodied cognition =

- brain, body and environment shape cognition

- cognitive states are not identical with brain states (identity theory)

- cognition cannot be studied independently from its implementation (functionalism)

- brain, body and environment are more then realizers, they structure cognition (functionalist embodied cognition)

What stance does embodied cognition has to the mind body problem (Descartes)?

- the mind (is/is not) an observable entity or abstraction

- the body (is/is not) just a physical realizer of mental states

- the body (does/ does not) offer possibilities for action and provides with experential perspective on the world

enacted embodied cognition= 'action in perception', movement is necessary for the development of visual perception

- biological organism are self-organizing

ex: 'kitten carousel' active kittens: could make visuospatial discriminations, whereas passive kittens could not

Which problems do Theory Theory and Simulation Theory have to face?

1. argument from phenomenology

2. problem of computational complexity

3. the frame problem

4. all of the above

1= if theorizing/simulating processes are pervasive we should have some awareness of them

- in our everyday interaction with others we are not consciously using a theory or running a simulation

1. argument from phenomenology

2. problem of computational complexity

3. the frame problem

3 = no intrinsic limit on the scope that could be relevant for mindreading processes

TT: which principle should we apply in a particular situation?

ST: which mental state of the other agent should we simulate

_= if theorizing/simulating processes are pervasive we should have some awareness of them

- in our everyday interaction with others we are not consciously using a theory or running a simulation

1. argument from phenomenology

2. problem of computational complexity

3. the frame problem

2= theorizing or simulation processes ate highly demanding in terms of computational complexity, whereas most of other interactions are smooth

but there is no complexity at the subpersonal/subconscious level and mindreading is done subconsciously

1. argument from phenomenology

2. problem of computational complexity

3. the frame problem

B) interaction theory= social interaction cen be explained in terms of embodied practicies; without invoking mind reading

we don't need to attribute mental states to others to understand them

A) triadic interactions

B) interaction theory

C)Theory Theory

D) Simulation Theory

Interaction theory: understanding others involves

1. Intersubjective perceptual processes = (primary/secondary) intersubjectivity

2. contextualized interaction = (primary/secondary) intersubjectivity

Interaction theory: understanding others involves

1 = perceptual capacities (facial imagination) and reading emotions from actions and expressive movements

1. Intersubjective perceptual processes = primary intersubjectivity

2. contextualized interaction =secondary intersubjectivity

Interaction theory: understanding others involves

2 = perceptual capacities become embedded in social and pragmatic context

1. Intersubjective perceptual processes = primary intersubjectivity

2. contextualized interaction =secondary intersubjectivity

Interaction Theory:

Triadic interactions = involve an object or event that becomes a focus between people

ex: 'social refrencing' - infants try to obtain emotional cues from others to assist in their own assessment of ambiguous situations

Interaction Theory

- primary and secondary intersubjectivity (do/ do not) create a baseline for social understanding

- they (do /do not) characterize most of our interactions

- they (do /do not) characterize mindreading

- they (are/ are not) against the Cartesian idea: that the mind is hidden behind overt behavior and needs to be assessed by Theory Theory or Simulation Theory

Does interaction theory face the frame problem?

(yes/no)

frame problem= no intrinsic limit on the scope that is relevant for the mindreading process

- not everything is relevant: there (is/ is no) a priori limit on what embodied cues are relevant to understanding others

- what matters to social understanding (is/ is not) imposed by the specifics of the particular situation

2 = infants of 10-13 mths. crawl over the glass to get a toy, when they reach the end their mother smiles: infant crosses, mother angry/sad: infant does not cross

-> perceptual cues are constrained by the situation at hand

This is an example of:

1.  mechanical, behavioral, intentional stories

2. Visual cliff experiment

What is a challenge to interaction theory? mirror neurons

Why are mirror neurons a challenge to interaction theory?

- Where should we draw the line between perceptual processes and subpersonal simulation?

Mirror neurons = instance of direct perception, no further inferential step that goes beyond what is perceived

What is a challenge to Interaction Theory and Embodied Cognition?

- probably both make no difference in psychological research: do not contribute to different experimental designs, are just a question of interpretation