From Intersubjectivity to Interbeing: Difference between revisions
unknown (talk) No edit summary |
unknown (talk) |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
From the reading notes of Michel Bauwens, 2006: | From the reading notes of Michel Bauwens, 2006: | ||
There are three approaches to the study of the mind within cognitive science: | |||
- 1) cognitivist | |||
- 2) connectionist | |||
- 3) enactive | |||
Let's summarize the differences: | |||
In the first two models, there is no place for human experience; but for the enactive paradigm, consciousness equals being in the world, and are NOT merely 'mental states' | |||
==Cognitivist: 1950-70s== | |||
- The 'computer model of the mind'. Cognition is seen as information processing, the brain is a physical symbol system. Personal consciousness has no access to subconscious mental processes; deductive logic. | |||
==Connectionist: late seventies== | |||
- 'Mind as self-organizing neural network; interaction between lower elements lead to the emergence of higher phenomena; percepttual pattern recognition; non-linear dynamics. | |||
==Enactive: eighties== | |||
- Cognition emerges from interaction between brain, body , and environment; mind and world are not separat4ed but a coupe; the cognitive unconscious is embedded throughout the body. | |||
=More information= | =More information= | ||
Revision as of 09:42, 4 January 2023
Article: Human Consciousness: from intersubjectivity to interbeing.Evan Thompson
URL = http://www.philosophy.ucf.edu/pcsfetz1.html
on the enactive theory of consciousness
Contextual Quote
"Human consciousness is not located in the head, but is immanent in the living body and the interpersonal social world. One’s consciousness of oneself as an embodied individual embedded in the world emerges through empathic cognition of others. Consciousness is not some peculiar qualitative aspect of private mental states, nor a property of the brain inside the skull; it is a relational mode of being of the whole person embedded in the natural environment and the human social world."
- Evan Thompson [1]
Description
Evan Thompson contrasts three approaches to human consciousness. He finds that both the cognitivist and the connectionist approaches rely on a undue separation between a representational mind and the world it represents. The enactive approach, pioneered by Varela and others, on the other hand, is based on a structural coupling of the brain, the body, and its environment.
Summary
From the reading notes of Michel Bauwens, 2006:
There are three approaches to the study of the mind within cognitive science:
- 1) cognitivist - 2) connectionist - 3) enactive
Let's summarize the differences:
In the first two models, there is no place for human experience; but for the enactive paradigm, consciousness equals being in the world, and are NOT merely 'mental states'
Cognitivist: 1950-70s
- The 'computer model of the mind'. Cognition is seen as information processing, the brain is a physical symbol system. Personal consciousness has no access to subconscious mental processes; deductive logic.
Connectionist: late seventies
- 'Mind as self-organizing neural network; interaction between lower elements lead to the emergence of higher phenomena; percepttual pattern recognition; non-linear dynamics.
Enactive: eighties
- Cognition emerges from interaction between brain, body , and environment; mind and world are not separat4ed but a coupe; the cognitive unconscious is embedded throughout the body.
More information
More by Evan Thompson at http://individual.utoronto.ca/evant/