2020
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566385
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Minds, Brains, and Capacities: Situated Cognition and Neo-Aristotelianism

Abstract: This article compares situated cognition to contemporary Neo-Aristotelian approaches to the mind. The article distinguishes two components in this paradigm: an Aristotelian essentialism which is alien to situated cognition and a Wittgensteinian “capacity approach” to the mind which is not just congenial to it but provides important conceptual and argumentative resources in defending social cognition against orthodox cognitive (neuro-)science. It focuses on a central tenet of that orthodoxy. According to what I… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4 This approach is an example of the mereological fallacy. 9,10 This fallacy is often referred to when discussing the definition or nature of consciousness. 9 The fallacy is summarised thus: 'ascribing to a part of a creature attributes which logically can be ascribed only to the creature as a whole'.…”
Section: Philosophy and Logicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 This approach is an example of the mereological fallacy. 9,10 This fallacy is often referred to when discussing the definition or nature of consciousness. 9 The fallacy is summarised thus: 'ascribing to a part of a creature attributes which logically can be ascribed only to the creature as a whole'.…”
Section: Philosophy and Logicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparing the chart above, most indicators of cognitive load [10][11][12][13] NASA scale are at a "moderate" level by the GP residents, generally indicating that the intensity of on-site epidemic prevention and control (training) can be tolerated. However, there are still some who are not in a good state.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…More specifically, we claim that self-control should be understood as a quite general ability that can only be meaningfully ascribed to persons-in-context, and not to specific mechanisms happening inside their brains. One argument for this is conceptual: self-control is defined as a struggle by individuals who experience both valued goals and tempting motivations, and who take steps to resolve this struggle by deploying various skills (for more extensive arguments for this claim, see [29][30][31]). A second, empirical argument (which we will further develop in this article) is that both the values agents judge as important and the strategies they employ to resist temptations, depend critically on their relationship to the particular behaviour settings they inhabit [10].…”
Section: Situated Self-control: An Overview Of the Proposalmentioning
confidence: 99%