Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 541–563 | Cite as

Dynamic Embodied Cognition



In this article, we investigate the merits of an enactive view of cognition for the contemporary debate about social cognition. If enactivism is to be a genuine alternative to classic cognitivism, it should be able to bridge the “cognitive gap”, i.e. provide us with a convincing account of those higher forms of cognition that have traditionally been the focus of its cognitivist opponents. We show that, when it comes to social cognition, current articulations of enactivism are—despite their celebrated successes in explaining some cases of social interaction—not yet up to the task. This is because they (1) do not pay sufficient attention to the role of offline processing or “decoupling”, and (2) obscure the cognitive gap by overemphasizing the role of phenomenology. We argue that the main challenge for the enactive view will be to acknowledge the importance of both coupled (online) and decoupled (offline) processes for basic and advanced forms of (social) cognition. To meet this challenge, we articulate a dynamic embodied view of cognition. We illustrate the fruitfulness of this approach by recourse to recent findings on false belief understanding.


Social cognition Enactivism Embodied cognition Cognitive gap False belief understanding 


  1. Adolph, K. E., Vereijken, B., & Shrout, P. E. (2003). What changes in infant walking and why. Child Development, 74, 474–497.Google Scholar
  2. Apperly, I., & Butterfill, S. (2009). Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review, 116, 953–970.Google Scholar
  3. Aschersleben, G., Hofer, T., & Jovanovic, B. (2008). The link between infant attention to goal-directed action and later theory of mind abilities. Developmental Science, 11, 862–868.Google Scholar
  4. Astington, J. W., & Jenkins, J. M. (1999). A longitudinal study of the relationship between language and theory-of-mind development. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1311–1320.Google Scholar
  5. Baillargeon, R., Scott, R. M., & Zijing, H. (2010). False-belief understanding in infants. Trends in Cognitive Science, 14(3), 110–118.Google Scholar
  6. Barandiaran, X., & Moreno, A. (2008). Adaptivity: from metabolism to behavior. Adaptive Behavior, 16, 325–344.Google Scholar
  7. Baron-Cohen, S. (2001). Theory of mind in normal development and autism. Prisme, 34, 174–183.Google Scholar
  8. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition, 21, 37–46.Google Scholar
  9. Barandiaran, X., Di Paolo, E. A., & Rohde, M. (2009). Defining agency: Individuality, normativity, asymmetry, and spatio-temporality in action. Adaptive Behavior, 17(5), 367–386.Google Scholar
  10. Bermúdez, J. L. (2003). The domain of folk psychology. In A. O’Hear (Ed.), Minds and Persons (pp. 25–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Birch, S. A. J., & Bloom, P. (2007). The curse of knowledge in reasoning about false beliefs. Psychological Science, 18(5), 382–386.Google Scholar
  12. Bloom, P., & German, T. (2000). Two reasons to abandon the false belief task as a test of theory of mind. Cognition, 77, B25–B31.Google Scholar
  13. Boden, M. (2006). Mind as machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Braddon-Mitchell, D., & Jackson, F. (2007). Philosophy of mind and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Carlson, S., & Moses, L. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children’s theory of mind. Child Development, 72, 1032–1053.Google Scholar
  16. Carlson, S., Moses, L., & Breton, C. (2002). How specific is the relation between executive function and theory of mind? Contributions of inhibitory control and working memory. Infant and Child Development, 11, 73–92.Google Scholar
  17. Carpenter, M., Akhtar, N., & Tomasello, M. (1998). Fourteen- through 18-month-old infants differentially imitate intentional and accidental actions. Infant Behavior & Development, 21, 315–330.Google Scholar
  18. Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Clark, A. (1989). Microcognition: Philosophy, cognitive science, and parallel distributed processing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Clark, A. (2001). Reasons, robots, and the extended mind. Mind and Language, 16, 121–133.Google Scholar
  21. Clements, W. A., & Perner, J. (1994). Implicit understanding of belief. Cognitive Development, 9, 377–397.Google Scholar
  22. Cole, K., & Mitchell, P. (2000). Siblings in the development of executive control and a theory-of-mind. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18, 279–295.Google Scholar
  23. Csibra, G., & Southgate, V. (2006). Evidence for infants’ understanding of false beliefs should not be dismissed. Response to Ruffman and Perner. Trends in Cognitive Science, 10, 4–5.Google Scholar
  24. Currie, G. (2008). Some ways to understand people. Philosophical Explorations 11(3), 211–218.Google Scholar
  25. Currie, G., & Ravenscroft, I. (2002). Recreative minds: Imagination in philosophy and psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. De Jaegher, H., & Di Paolo, E. (2007). Participatory sense-making: An enactive approach to social cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 485–507.Google Scholar
  27. De Jaegher, H., & Froese, T. (2009). On the role of social interaction in individual agency. Adaptive Behavior, 17, 444–460.Google Scholar
  28. De Jaegher, H., Di Paolo, E. A., & Gallagher, S. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 441–447.Google Scholar
  29. De Villiers, J., & De Villiers, P. (2000). Linguistic determinism and the understanding of false beliefs. In P. Mitchell & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s reasoning and the mind (pp. 191–228). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  30. Dunn, J., Brown, J., Slomkowski, C., Tesla, C., & Younblade, L. (1991). Young children’s understanding of other people’s feelings and beliefs: Individual differences and their antecendents. Child Development, 62, 1352–1366.Google Scholar
  31. Farrar, M. J., & Maag, L. (2002). Early language development and the emergence of a theory of mind. First language, 22, 197–213.Google Scholar
  32. Flavell, J. H. (2004). Theory-of-mind development: Retrospect and prospect. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly Journal of Developmental Psychology, 50, 274–290.Google Scholar
  33. Fodor, J. (1992). A theory of the child’s theory of mind. Cognition, 44, 283–296.Google Scholar
  34. Froese, T., & Di Paolo, E. A. (2009). Sociality and the life-mind continuity thesis. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8, 439–463.Google Scholar
  35. Fuchs, T., & De Jaegher, H. (2009). Enactive intersubjectivity: Participatory sense-making and mutual incorporation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8, 465–486.Google Scholar
  36. Gale, E., deVilliers, P., deVilliers, J., & Pyers, J. (1996). Language and theory of mind in oral deaf children. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  37. Gallagher, S. (2001). The practice of mind: Theory, simulation, or interaction? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, 83–107.Google Scholar
  38. Gallagher, S. (2004). Understanding interpersonal problems in autism: Interaction theory as an alternative to theory of mind. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology, 11, 199–217.Google Scholar
  39. Gallagher, S. (2005). How the body shapes the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Gallagher, S. (2007). Simulation trouble. Social Neuroscience, 2, 353–365.Google Scholar
  41. Gallagher, S. (2008). Are minimal representations still representations? International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 16, 351–369.Google Scholar
  42. Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2008). The phenomenological mind: An introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Gallese, V. (2005). ‘Being like me’: Self-other identity, mirror neurons and empathy. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: From cognitive neuroscience to social science: Mechanisms of imitation and imitation in animals (pp. 101–118). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  44. Garzón, F. C. (2008). Towards a General Theory of Antirepresentationalism. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 59, 259–292.Google Scholar
  45. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2005). Folk psychology as a model. Philosopher's Imprint, 5, 1–16.Google Scholar
  46. Goldman, A. (1989). Interpretation psychologized. Mind & Language, 4, 161–185.Google Scholar
  47. Goldman, A. (2006). Simulating minds: The philosophy, psychology and neuroscience of mindreading. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Gopnik, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (1997). Words, thoughts, and theories. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Gordon, R. M. (1986). Folk psychology as simulation. Mind and Language, 1, 158–171.Google Scholar
  50. Gordon, R. M. (2008). Beyond mindreading. Philosophical Explorations, 11(3), 219–222.Google Scholar
  51. Hala, S., Hug, S., & Henderson, A. (2003). Executive functioning and false-belief understanding in preschool children: Two tasks are harder than one. Journal of Cognitive Development, 4, 275–298.Google Scholar
  52. Hale, C. M., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (2003). The influence of language on theory of mind: A training study. Developmental Science, 6, 346–359.Google Scholar
  53. Heal, J. (1986). Replication and Functionalism. In J. Butterfield (Ed.), Language, mind, and logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Herschbach, M. (2008). Folk psychological and phenomenological accounts of social perception. Philosophical Explorations, 11, 223–235.Google Scholar
  55. Hodgkin, A. L., & Huxley, A. F. (1952). A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. The Journal of Physiology, 117, 500–544.Google Scholar
  56. Hurley, S. (2008). The shared circuits model (SCM): How control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 1–58.Google Scholar
  57. Hutto, D. D. (2004). The limits of spectatorial folk psychology. Mind and Language, 19, 548–573.Google Scholar
  58. Hutto, D. D. (2008). Folk psychological narratives: The sociocultural basis of understanding reasons. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  59. Hutto, D. (2011). Elementary mind-minding enactivist style. In A. Seemann (Ed.)., Developments in Philosophy, Psychology, and Neuroscience. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  60. Izhikevich, E. M. (2007). Dynamical Systems in neuroscience: The geometry of excitability and bursting. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  61. Kovács, A., Teglas, E., & Endress, A. (2010). The social sense: Susceptibility to others’ beliefs in human infants and adults. Science, 330, 1830–1834.Google Scholar
  62. Lakoff, G., & Johnston, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  63. Leslie, A. M., Friedman, O., & German, T. P. (2004). Core mechanisms in “theory of mind”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 528–533.Google Scholar
  64. Leslie, A. M., German, T. P., & Polizzi, P. (2005). Belief-desire reasoning as a process of selection. Cognitive Psychology, 50, 45–85.Google Scholar
  65. Lohmann, H., & Tomasello, M. (2003). The role of language in the development in false belief understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144.Google Scholar
  66. Maibom, H. (2003). The mindreader and the scientist. Mind and Language, 18, 296–315.Google Scholar
  67. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  68. Meltzoff, A. N. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Developmental Psychology, 31, 838–850.Google Scholar
  69. Meltzoff, A. N., & Brooks, R. (2001). ‘Like me’ as a building block for understanding other minds: Bodily acts, attention, and intention. In B. F. Malle, L. J. Moses, & D. A. Baldwin (Eds.), Intentions and intentionality: Foundations of social cognition (pp. 171–191). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  70. Mitchell, P. (1996). Acquiring a conception of mind. A review of psychological research and theory. Hove, E. Sussex: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  71. Moore, C., Pure, K., & Furrow, D. (1990). Children’s understanding of the modal expression of speakers certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of representational theory of mind. Child Development, 61, 722–730.Google Scholar
  72. Nichols, S., & Stich, S. (2003). Mindreading. An integrated account of pretence, self-awareness, and understanding of other minds. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  73. Noë, A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  74. O’Regan, J. K., & Noë, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 939–973.Google Scholar
  75. Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? Science, 308, 255–258.Google Scholar
  76. Perner, J., & Lang, B. (1999). Development of theory of mind and executive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(9), 337–344.Google Scholar
  77. Perner, J., Lang, B., & Kloo, D. (2002). Theory of Mind and Self Control: More than a common problem of inhibition. Child Development, 73, 752–767.Google Scholar
  78. Perner, J., & Ruffman, T. (2005). Infant’s insight into the mind: How deep? Science, 308, 214–216.Google Scholar
  79. Port, R. F., & Van Gelder, T. (1995). Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  80. Ratcliffe, M. (2006). ‘Folk psychology’ is not folk psychology. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 5, 31–52.Google Scholar
  81. Ratcliffe, M. (2007). Rethinking commonsense psychology: A critique of folk psychology, theory of mind and simulation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  82. Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (2009). A short primer on situated cognition (pp. 3–10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Ruffman, T., Garnham, W., Import, A., & Connolly, D. (2001). Does Eye gaze indicate knowledge of false belief: Charting transitions in knowledge. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 80, 201–224.Google Scholar
  84. Ruffman, T., & Perner, J. (2005). Do infants really understand false belief? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 462–463.Google Scholar
  85. Rupert, R. (2009). Cognitive systems and the extended mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Russell, J. (1996). Agency: Its role in mental development. Hove: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  87. Scott, R. M., & Baillargeon, R. (2009). Which penguin is this? Attributing false beliefs about identity at 18 months. Child Development, 80, 1172–1196.Google Scholar
  88. Shannon, B. (1993). The representational and the presentational. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  89. Sirois, S., & Jackson, I. (2007). Social cognition in infancy: A critical review of research on higher order abilities. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 4, 46–64.Google Scholar
  90. Smith, L. B., & Thelen, E. (2003). Development as a dynamic system. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 343–348.Google Scholar
  91. Sodian, B. (2005). Theory of mind. The case for conceptual development. In W. Schneider, R. Schumann-Hengsteler, & B. Sodian (Eds.), Young children’s cognitive development. Interrelationships among working memory, theory of mind, and executive functions (pp. 95–130). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  92. Sodian, B. (2010). Theory of mind in infancy. Child Development Perspectives 4(3), 267–271.Google Scholar
  93. Song, H., & Baillargeon, R. (2008). Infants’ reasoning about others’ false perceptions. Developmental Psycholology, 44(6), 1789–1795.Google Scholar
  94. Southgate, V., Senju, A., & Csibra, G. (2007). Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by two-year-olds. Psychological Science, 18, 587–592.Google Scholar
  95. Stewart, J., Gapenne, O., & Di Paolo, E. A. (2011). Enaction: Towards a new paradigm for cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  96. Spaulding, S. (2010). Embodied cognition and mindreading. Mind & Language, 25(1), 119–140.Google Scholar
  97. Spivey, M. (2007). The continuity of mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Surian, L., Caldi, S., & Sperber, D. (2007). Attribution of beliefs by 13-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 18(7), 580–586.Google Scholar
  99. Thompson, E., & Stapleton, M. (2009). Making sense of sense-making: Reflections on enactive and extended mind theories. Topoi, 28, 23–30.Google Scholar
  100. Thompson, E. (2005). Sensorimotor subjectivity and the enactive approach to experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4, 407–427.Google Scholar
  101. Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Torrance, S. (2006). In search of the enactive: Introduction to special issue on enactive experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4, 357–368.Google Scholar
  103. Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Träuble, B., Marinovic, V., & Pauen, S. (2010). Early theory of mind competencies—Do infants understand others’ beliefs? Infancy, 15, 434–444.Google Scholar
  105. Van Gelder, T. (1995). What might cognition be, if not computation? Journal of Philosophy, 92, 345–381.Google Scholar
  106. Van Gelder, T. (1998). The dynamical hypothesis in cognitive science. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 615–665.Google Scholar
  107. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  108. Walter, S. (2010). Locked-in syndrome, BCI, and a confusion about embodied, embedded, extended, and enacted cognition. Neuroethics, 3, 61–72.Google Scholar
  109. Watson, A., Painter, J., & Bornstein, M. (2002). Longitudinal relations between 2-year-olds’ language and 4-year-olds’ theory of mind. Journal of Cognition and Development, 2, 449–457.Google Scholar
  110. Weber, A., & Varela, F. J. (2002). Life after Kant: Natural purposes and the autopoietic foundations of biological individuality. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1, 97–125.Google Scholar
  111. Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta-analysis of Theory of Mind development: The truth about false-belief. Child Development, 72(3), 655–684.Google Scholar
  112. Wellman, H. M. (2002). Understanding the psychological world: Developing a theory of mind. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 167–187). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  113. Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy IIRuhr-University BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations