Lived Experience and Cognitive Science Reappraising Enactivism’s Jonasian Turn
Mario Villalobos & Dave Ward
Download the full text in
PDF (1443 kB)
> Citation
> Similar
> References
> Add Comment
Abstract
Context: The majority of contemporary
enactivist work is influenced by the philosophical biology of Hans
Jonas. Jonas credits all living organisms with experience that involves
particular “existential” structures: nascent forms of concern for
self-preservation and desire for objects and outcomes that promote
well-being. We argue that Jonas’s attitude towards living systems
involves a problematic anthropomorphism that threatens to place
enactivism at odds with cognitive science, and undermine its legitimate
aims to become a new paradigm for scientific investigation and
understanding of the mind. Problem: Enactivism
needs to address the tension between its Jonasian influences and its
aspirations to become a new paradigm for cognitive science. By relying
on Jonasian phenomenology, contemporary enactivism obscures alternative
ways in which phenomenology can be more smoothly integrated with
cognitive science. Method: We outline the
historical relationship between enactivism and phenomenology, and
explain why anthropomorphism is problematic for a research program that
aspires to become a new paradigm for cognitive science. We examine the
roots of Jonas’s existential interpretation of biological facts, and
describe how and why Jonas himself understood his project as founded on
an anthropomorphic assumption that is incompatible with a crucial
methodological assumption of scientific enquiry: the prohibition of
unexplained natural purposes. We describe the way in which phenomenology
can be integrated into Maturana’s autopoietic theory, and use this as
an example of how an alternative, non-anthropomorphic science of the
biological roots of cognition might proceed. Results: Our
analysis reveals a crucial tension between Jonas’s influence on
enactivism and enactivism’s paradigmatic aspirations. This suggests the
possibility of, and need to investigate, other ways of integrating
phenomenology with cognitive science that do not succumb to this
tension. Implications: In light of this,
enactivists should either eliminate the Jonasian inference from
properties of our human experience to properties of the experience of
all living organisms, or articulate an alternative conception of
scientific enquiry that can tolerate the anthropomorphism this inference
entails. The Maturanian view we present in the article’s final section
constitutes a possible framework within which enactivist tools and
concepts can be used to understand cognition and phenomenology, and that
does not involve a problematic anthropomorphism. Constructivist content: Any
constructivist approach that aims for integration with current
scientific practice must either avoid the type of anthropomorphic
inference on which Jonas bases his work, or specify a new conception of
scientific enquiry that renders anthropomorphism unproblematic.
Key words: Human experience, living beings, autopoietic theory, enactivism, Hans Jonas, phenomenology.
Citation
Villalobos M. & Ward D. (2016) Lived experience and cognitive
science reappraising enactivism’s jonasian turn. Constructivist
Foundations 11(2): 204–212. http://constructivist.info/11/2/204
Export article citation data:
Plain Text ·
BibTex ·
EndNote ·
Reference Manager (RIS)
Similar articles
References
Bailly F. & Longo G. (2006) Mathématiques et sciences de la nature. La singularité physique du vivant. Hermann, Paris.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Capra F. (1996) The web of life: A new understanding of living systems. Anchor Books, New York.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
De Jesus P. (2015)
Autopoietic enactivism, phenomenology and the deep continuity between
life and mind. Phenomenology and Cognitive Science. Online first.
http://cepa.info/2385
Di Paolo E. A. (2003)
Organismically-inspired robotics: Homeostatic adaptation and teleology
beyond the closed sensorimotor loop. In: Murase K. & Asakura T.
(eds.) Dynamical Systems Approach to Embodiment and Sociality. Advanced
Knowledge International, Adelaide: 19–42.
http://cepa.info/2514
Di Paolo E. A. (2009)
Overcoming autopoiesis. In: Magalhães R. & Sanchez R. (eds.)
Autopoiesis in organization: Theory and practice. Emerald, Bingley:
43–68.
http://cepa.info/2366
Di Pellegrino G., Fadiga L., Fogassi L., Gallese V. & Rizzolatti G. (1992) Understanding motor events: A neurophysiological study. Experimental Brain Research 91: 176–180.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Dretske F. (1981) Knowledge and the flow of information. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Froese T. (2011) Breathing new life into cognitive science. AVANT. The Journal of the Philosophical-Interdisciplinary Vanguard 2(1): 113–129.
http://cepa.info/412
Gallagher S. (2012)
On the possibility of naturalizing phenomenology. In: Zahavi D. (ed.)
The Oxford handbook of contemporary phenomenology. Oxford University
Press, Oxford: 70–93.
http://cepa.info/2279
Graziano M. S. A. (2009) The intelligent movement machine: An ethological perspective on the primate motor system. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Graziano M. S. A. (2015) Ethological action maps: A paradigm shift for the motor cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20(2): 121–132.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Hauser M. D., Chomsky N. & Fitch W. T. (2002) The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298(5598): 1569–1579.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Hodges B. (2009) Ecological pragmatics: Values, dialogical arrays, complexity, and caring. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(3): 628–625.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Hösle V. (2008)
Hans Jonas’s position in the history of German philosophy. In:
Tirosh-Samuelson H. & Wiese C. (eds.) The legacy of Hans Jonas.
Brill, Leiden: 19–38.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Husserl E. (1973) Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Zweiter Teil: 1921–1928. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Jonas H. (1966)
The phenomenon of life. Toward a philosophical biology. Harper &
Row, New York. Reprinted in 2000 by Northwestern University Press.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kaas J. H., Gharbawie O. A. & Stepniewska I. (2013) Cortical networks for ethologically relevant behaviors in primates. American Journal of Primatology 75(5): 407–414.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kennedy J. S. (1992) The new anthropomorphism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge MA.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kuhn T. (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lindberg S. (2005)
Hans Jonas’s theory of life in the face of responsibility. In: Lembeck
K.-H., Mertens K. & Orth E. W. (eds.) Phänomenologische Forschungen.
Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg: 175–192.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lipps T. (1903) Einfühlung, innere Nachahmung, und Organempfindung. Archiv für die Gesamte Psychologie I (2), W. Engelmann, Leipzig: 185–204.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Longo G. & Montévil M. (2012)
Randomness increases order in biological evolution. In: Dinneen M.,
Khoussainov B. & Nies A. (eds.) Computation, physics and beyond.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7160, Springer, Berlin: 289–308.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. (1959) Number of fibres in the optic nerve and the number of ganglion cells in the retina of Anurans. Science 183 (4672): 1406–1407.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. (1978)
Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In: Miller G. &
Lenneberg E. (eds.) Psychology and biology of language and thought:
Essays in honor of Eric Lenneberg. Academic Press, New York: 27–63.
http://cepa.info/549
Maturana H. R. (1990)
Science and daily life: The ontology of scientific explanations. In:
Krohn W., Kuppers G. & Nowotny H. (eds.) Selforganization: Portrait
of a scientific revolution. Springer: 12–35.
http://cepa.info/607
Maturana H. R. (2002)
Autopoiesis, structural coupling and cognition: A history of these and
other notions in the biology of cognition. Cybernetics and Human Knowing
9(3–4): 5–34.
http://cepa.info/685
Maturana H. R. (2003)
The biological foundations of self-consciousness and the physical
domain of existence. In: Luhmann N., Maturana H., Namiki M., Redder V.
& Varela F. (eds.) Beobachter: Konvergenz der Erkenntnistheorien?
Second edition. Wilhelm Fink, Munich: 47–117.
http://cepa.info/609
Maturana H. R., Uribe G. & Frenk S. (1968)
A biological theory of relativistic colour coding in the primate
retina: A discussion of nervous system closure with reference to certain
visual effects. Archivos de Biología y Medicina Experimentales
Suplemento 1: 1–30.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Millikan R. G. (1984) Language, thought and other biological categories. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Mitchell R. W. & Hamm M. (1996) The interpretation of animal psychology: Anthropomorphism or behavior reading? Behaviour 134: 173–204.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Penfield W. & Boldrey E. (1937)
Somatic motor and sensory representation in the cerebral cortex of man
as studied by electrical stimulation. Brain 60(4): 389–443.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Petit J.-L. (1999)
Constitution by movement: Husserl in light of recent neurobiological
findings. In: Petitot J., Varela F. J., Pachoud B. & Roy J. M.
(eds.) Naturalizing phenomenology: Issues in contemporary phenomenology
and cognitive science. Stanford University Press, Stanford: 220–244.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rizzolatti G. & Sinigaglia C. (2006) So quel che fai. Il cervello che agisce e i neuroni specchio. Raffaello Cortina Editore, Milano.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rizzolatti G., Gentilucci M., Fogassi L., Luppino G., Matelli M. & Ponzoni Maggi S. (1987) Neurons related to goal-directed motor acts in inferior area 6 of the macaque monkey. Experimental Brain Research 67: 220–224.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Salice A. (2015)
The phenomenology of the Munich and Göttingen circles. In: Zalta E. N.
(ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2015 Edition).
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Simon R. (1985)
A frog’s eye view of the world. Structure is destiny: An interview with
Humberto Maturana. The Family Therapy Networker 9(3): 32–37; 41–43.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Spiegelberg H. (1994) The phenomenological movement: A historical introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Taguchi S. (2006) Das Problem des “Ur-Ich” bei Edmund Husserl. Die Frage nach der selbstverständlichen “Nähe” des Selbst. Springer, Dordrecht.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Thompson E. (2004)
Life and mind: From autopoiesis to neurophenomenology. A tribute to
Francisco Varela. Phenomenology and the cognitive sciences 3: 381–398.
http://cepa.info/1137
Trnka J. (2016) Hans Jonas on teleology in biology: The relevance of existential philosophy for biological thinking. Límite 10 (34): 41–49.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Varela F. J. (1984)
Living ways of sense-making: A middle path for neuroscience. In:
Livingston P. (ed.) Disorder and order. Proceedings of the Stanford
International Symposium. Anma Libri, Stanford: 208–224.
http://cepa.info/2068
Varela F. J. (1991)
Organism: A meshwork of selfless selves. In: Tauber A. (ed.) Organism
and the origin of self. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 79–107.
http://cepa.info/1959
Varela F. J. (1992)
Autopoiesis and a biology of intentionality. In: McMullin B. (ed.)
Proceedings of the workshop “Autopoiesis and perception.” Dublin City
University, Dublin: 4–14.
http://cepa.info/1274
Villalobos M. (2015)
The biological roots of cognition and the social origins of mind:
Autopoietic theory, strict naturalism and cybernetics. Ph.D Thesis,
University of Edinburgh.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Vogel L. (1996)
The outcry of mute things. Hans Jonas’s imperative of responsibility.
In: MacAuley D. (ed.) Minding nature: The philosophers of ecology.
Guilford Press, New York: 167–185.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Vörös S. & Gaitsch P. (2016)
Desire and/or need for life? Towards a phenomenological dialectic of
the organism. In: Tønnessen M., Rattasepp & Oma K. A. (eds.)
Thinking about animals in the age of the anthropocene. Lexington Books,
Lanham: 135–160.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Weber A. (2002)
The surplus of meaning: Biosemiotic aspects in Francisco J. Varela’s
philosophy of cognition. Cybernetics & Human Knowing 9(2): 11–29.
http://cepa.info/2470
Weemans M. & Prévost B. (2014) Introduction. In: Melion W. S., Rothstein B. & Weemans M. (eds.) The anthropomorphic lens. Brill, Leiden: 1–18.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Welton D. (2011)
Can a top-down phenomenology of intentional consciousness be integrated
with a bottom-up phenomenology of biological systems? Philosophy today
55: 102–113.
http://cepa.info/2476
Wynne C. (2007)
What are animals? Why anthropomorphism is still not a scientific
approach to behavior. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews 2:
125–135.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Yolton J. W. (1967) Review of “The Phenomenon of Life: Towards a Philosophical Biology” (by Hans Jonas). The Journal of Philosophy 64(8): 254–258.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Comments: 0
To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.