Extended Cognition and the Internet

Abstract

The Internet is an important focus of attention for those concerned with issues of extended cognition. In particular, the application of active externalist theorizing to the Internet gives rise to the notion of Internet-extended cognition: the idea that the Internet can (on occasion) form part of an integrated nexus of material elements that serves as the realization base for human mental states and processes. The current review attempts to survey a range of issues and controversies that arise in respect of the notion of Internet-extended cognition. These include the issue of whether the Internet, as a technological system, is able to support real-world cases of cognitive extension. It also includes issues concerning the cognitive and epistemic impacts of the Internet. Finally, the review highlights a range of issues and concerns that have not been the focus of previous philosophical attention. These include issues of 'network-extended cognitive bloat', 'conjoined minds', and an entirely new form of cognitive extension that goes under the heading of 'human-extended machine cognition'. Together, these issues serve to highlight the value and importance of Internet-extended cognition to contemporary philosophical debates about the extended mind. In particular, the notion of Internet-extended cognition has the potential to highlight points of philosophical progress that are not easily revealed by the kind of technologically low-grade cases that tend to animate the majority of philosophical discussions in this area.

Intelligent agent-assisted organizational memory in knowledge management systems

“…In addition to organizational memory enhancement, the development and implementation of IAs in this three-industry analysis support several aspects of the HEMC as hypothesized by Smart (2017) and related conceptions of deep and complex relationships with extra-organismic resources by Clark (2003Clark ( , 2008. Specifically, the findings of nonlinear bi-directional internet-using human contacts throughout the KM cycle may be viewed as facilitating extensions of multiple AI systems, cognitive computing platforms and machine-learning algorithms that raises an intriguing question of whether IAs are useful for advancement of organization memory and cognition and/or for broader HEMC beyond organizational domains with bi-directional information flow.…”

“…Dialog between humans and machines was explored in early conceptual work (Licklider, 1960) and later in practical areas such as conversational agents for specific contexts to simulate communication (Kopp et al, 2005). It has also been conceived that points of contact such as IAs are at the heart of human-extended machine cognition (HEMC), and/or further that humans are actually providing the physical machinery for a larger specific form of extended human-machine cognition (EHMC) (Smart, 2017) where human cognitive processing extends beyond the immediate environment or domain (Clark, 2003;Clark, 2008). Systems use IAs for different purposes such as personalizing information management for email filtering, e-commerce tools that locate information for purchasing and management of complicated commercial industrial processing including scheduling appointments and air traffic control (Dalkir, 2017;Elst et al, 2004).…”

From tech to tact: emotion dysregulation in online communication during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…Embodied approaches to cognitive science highlight how information and communication technologies (ICTs) provide much of the scaffolding of our cognitive and affective lives (e.g., Smart 2017 ; Krueger & Osler, 2019a , b ; Maiese, 2021 ). Further catalyzed by the digital push brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a flurry of theorizing about how ICTs are a crucial source of affective regulation (e.g., Tucker 2022 ; Osler & Zahavi, 2022 ).…”

Analysis of Beliefs Acquired from a Conversational AI: Instruments-based Beliefs, Testimony-based Beliefs, and Technology-based Beliefs

“…A similar approach is taken by Smart (2017). Compare both Green (2008) and Smart (2017) with Nickel (2013), who shifts from phenomenological similarities between technologies and humans, to pragmatic considerations of performing functions with speech outputs. However, Nickel's approach is not discussed in terms of the epistemology of testimony.…”