Debunking enactivism: a critical notice of Hutto and Myin’s Radicalizing Enactivism
Canadian Journal of Philosophy February 1, 2014 DOI: 10.1080/00455091.2014.905251 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Review Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Citations | 33 |
| Key findings | A non-representational theory of mind cannot differentiate cognition from other bodily engagements, and it fails to account for how semantically interacting representations are needed to explain choice and action. |
Abstract
In this review of Hutto and Myin’s Radicalizing Enactivism, I question the adequacy of a non-representational theory of mind. I argue first that such a theory cannot differentiate cognition from other bodily engagements such as wrestling with an opponent. Second, I question whether the simple robots constructed by Rodney Brooks are adequate as models of multimodal organisms. Last, I argue that Hutto and Myin pay very little attention to how semantically interacting representations are needed to give an account of choice and action.