The Extended Mind Argumentative Analysis

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