The Extended Mind Argumentative Analysis

Improved Essays
Andy Clark and David Chalmers presented “The Extended Mind” argument as a potential new option for the question of where does the mind stop and the world begin. This question nearly reflects the confusion that many individuals face of what is reality and what is merely perception. Given that this question could be more individual based leads to more questions rather than a closer solution. A common response to our question is if it is outside of the body, then it must be outside of the mind. This offers that the body and mind are of the same thread and leans more towards the limitation of a one track perspective. Another common response is that externalism about meaning is carried over to an externalism about the mind. An externalism about …show more content…
Active externalism can be defined as a coupled system. In this coupled system, there is a two-way interaction that can be seen as a cognitive system. The coupled system contains parts that all play an active and causal role and all govern behavior just as the idea of cognition functions. Clark and Chalmers compared this system to the brain in the fact that if one part of the system is removed, it would be as if one part of the brain is removed. Removal of one part of the brain leads to the halting of that part’s functions. While the brain will probably still work, it will not be whole. This comparison is raised to acknowledge the fact that although a part may be removed, all the other parts are just as important and their roles are still valued. The same goes for the system as it counts equally well whether it is wholly in the skull or not. Active externalism supports the idea that cognition can be inside the skull as well as outside the skin. If it is embraced, according to Clark and Chalmers, a more natural explanation of many actions will be allowed.
The extended mind theory when presented was significant for many reasons. Clark and Chalmers were advocating a view that was paralleled with a growing body of cognitive research. Their argument gave other researchers the option of taking theories that they once only investigated as an inner
…show more content…
One significant response to it was the paper by Fred Adams and Ken Aizawa. They proposed to defend common sense through their work on The bounds of cognition. In The bounds of cognition, Adams and Aizawa propose a multitude of arguments for the Extended Cognition Theory, basically picking apart the theory as a whole. Two of the arguments that are worth noting are the two marks of cognition and the coupling argument. In Adams and Aizawa’s writing, they establish acceptance of one of Clark and Chalmers’ principles. The principle that the skull is not a boundary of cognition is celebrated by both papers. Adams and Aizawa make an effort to use a different theory justify this principle as well as clarify other ideas of their

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Comparing and Contrasting Giddens and Bourdieu Anthony Giddens and Pierre Bourdieu both focused their social theories on proving the same phenomenon. The central focus of their studies was related to the relationship between structure and agency. Previous classical theorists stated that both structure and agency were two different concepts that existed in opposition to each other. However, Giddens and Bourdieu set out their theories to prove that both structure and agency are separate concepts but, at the same time, they are dialectical in nature. Both contemporary theorists developed a unique theoretical framework that overcame the original sentiment of structure and agency existing in opposition to one another.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rationalism and Empiricism are both separate theories of epistemology which is the attempt to understand the theory of knowledge. Though, the contrast between rationalism and empiricism are extreme. They both differentiate from each other and the key concepts of each other are largely contrasted. Empiricism, is the theory in which one learns through experience which is also known as ‘a posterior.’ Meanwhile, rationalism is when one uses logic and reason to come to a conclusion before the experience has taken place, this is known as ‘a priori.’ The key principles of rationalism are innate ideas, deduction and reason. Whereas empiricism, the principles are there are no innate ideas, induction trumps deduction and sense perception is the last…

    • 1139 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This allows for primary qualities to become visible in one’s mind or create an idea of that object. They are also considered as sensible qualities that are operated by motion and external in our organism. Secondary qualities are sense as colour, sounds and taste. He mentions that there might be a third sort in which allows these to barely be powers. In his essay he mentions that ideas are manifestly by impulse in which is the only way to make our body operate by both primary and secondary qualities.…

    • 813 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Creativity Vs Discipline

    • 1772 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Within the warrant, “a general principle or reason used to connect the data with the claim” (p. 194). Finally, Toulimin creates a “claim” to the response, data, and the warrant. Using an argument process like Toulimin’s, allows research to move towards truth and could ultimately provide more of a pluralistic outcome. If a writer were to use Toulimin’s model of argument, he or she leaves the argument open to assumptions within their claim. Toulimin is leading an argument towards “recognizing claims, data, warrants” which is much more diverse than the syllogistic…

    • 1772 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    With a large epistemic community, this would be prevented due to the idea that people within your epistemic community would notice the infinite regression in your belief system and would find fault with it. Another fault seen in the coherentist theory of justification is the idea that you can have multiple belief systems, which do not necessarily have to cohere with each other. You can have two belief systems that contradict each other on the simplest things. One can have two belief systems regarding where they are located, one being true and the other being false, and the coherentist would claim that they are justified in their beliefs. Having a large epistemic community would be able to point out the flaw in your contradictory beliefs and lead to one having more objective…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    I, and it seems a lot of philosophers do as well, have a great deal of trouble with getting a handle on what Cognition is. René Descartes states that the mind is ultimately the bit that thinks about thinking, his oft quoted “I think therefore I am” is a case in point. I also think that to have cognition one must also have intentionality, in that something must drive or exist in the conscious that supports the thoughts, beliefs, desires, hopes. This is what is missing from the aids to thought or mental states which is extended cognition. The central tenets of extended cognition are that cognition extends out of the mind and body.…

    • 1740 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Qualitative Approach

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The approaches we’ve discussed in this course in regard to action, the causal approach and the qualitative approach, are each worthy of fierce debate. Despite the persuasiveness of each, I believe there is one that is slightly more attractive than the other. Charles Taylor characterized these two general approaches as looking for an answer to, “what is the nature of action? Or otherwise put, what distinguishes (human) action from other kinds of events” (Taylor, pg. 77-78)?…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The process of both is under motion through the neural system. The mind has consecutive approaches that justify how individuals regard others and make attributions for them. Cognitive dissonance is merely seen at a confusing level engaging an individual’s behavior conflicting with his beliefs. At certain points cognitive dissonance can be avoided; when an individual knows himself and depending on what situation he stands. There is a possibility that cognitive dissonance can be reduced at some points.…

    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Dualism Vs Physicalism

    • 1103 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The view of physicalism gives a stronger and more plausible answer to the mind-body problem. There are several reasons why this particular view gives a more sensible for answer to the problem at hand. These reasons include the rationale behind the reasoning of brain research, how the different aspects of reductive physicalism is able to address the non-physical aspects of the mind, as well as the less than sensible claims that the opposing view, dualism, presents in comparison. One of the main reasons why physicalism is able to prove itself to be the better answer to the mind-body problem is based off of research that society has learned about on the brain. To lessen the aspect of the mind and brain being separate entities, there is a strong…

    • 1103 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Here the writer not only gives comments but also he has to provide the option of solution. This makes different with other text which researcher interests to take it as object of the research. Therefore, There are kinds of hortatory text, such Sudarwari & Grace( 2013: 199) explained that there are two kinds of hortatory text those are hortatory exposition and analytical exposition. Both of them have similarity in function to persuade the reader or listener to something should or should not be done. They also added, If it differentiates from each other, it can be seen in generic structure in the end of text.…

    • 1113 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays