Should cognitive scientists be any more embarrassed about their lack of a discipline-fixing definition of cognition than biologists are about their inability to define “life”? My answer is “no”. Philosophers seeking a unique “mark of the cognitive” or less onerous but nevertheless categorical characterizations of cognition are working at a level of analysis upon which hangs nothing that either cognitive scientists or philosophers of cognitive science should care about. In contrast, I advocate a pluralistic stance towards uses of the term ‘cognition’ that eschews the urge to treat cognition as a metaphysically well-defined “natural” kind.
KeywordsCognition Definition Animals Extended mind Group cognition Pluralism
I am grateful for invitation to present these ideas and discussion that ensued from members of the audience at the conference “What is Cognition?” organized by Cameron Buckner, Ellen Fridland, Albert Newen, and Michael Pauen at the Ruhr University, Bochum, in 2013. I am also very grateful for the patience of the editors of this special issue, which I have tested to the extreme. I have also benefited greatly from the very patient and constructive criticisms of reviewers for this journal, including the most patient of all, reviewer number 3. Earlier drafts also benefitted from comments by students and colleagues at Indiana University. Any further deficits in this paper serve as evidence of my own failure to possess any mark of cognition.
- Adams, F., & Aizawa, K. (2001). The bounds of cognition. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Allen, C., Grau, J. W., & Meagher, M. W. (2009). The lower bounds of cognition: What do spinal cords reveal? In J. Bickle (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of neuroscience (pp. 129–142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Angelucci, A., Clasca, F., Bricolo, E., Cramer, K. S., & Sur, M. (1997). Experimentally induced retinal projections to the ferret auditory thalamus: Development of clustered eye-specific patterns in a novel target. The Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 2040–2055.Google Scholar
- Aizawa, K. (2015). Cognition and behavior. Synthese, 1–20. doi: 10.1007/s11229-014-0645-5.
- Boag, Z. (2014). Interview of John Searle. New Philosopher Magazine (2). January 25, 2014. Retrieved from August 4, 2015. http://www.newphilosopher.com/articles/john-searle-it-upsets-me-when-i-read-the-nonsense-written-by-my-contemporaries/.
- Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Clark, A. (2010). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Dretske, F. I. (1981). Knowledge and the flow of information. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Figdor, C. (2014). On the proper domain of psychological predicates. Synthese, 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s11229-014-0603-2.
- Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J. (2015). Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for ‘top-down’ effects. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 1–77.Google Scholar
- Hills, T. T. (2003). Toward a unified theory of animal event timing. In W. H. Meck (Ed.), Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing (pp. 77–111). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
- Ludwig, K. (2015). Is distributed cognition group level cognition? Journal of Social Ontology, 1(2), 189–224.Google Scholar
- Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Newton, J. R., & Sur, M. (2005). Rewiring cortex functional visual plasticity in the auditory cortex during development. In J. Syka & M. M. Merzenich (Eds.), Plasticity of the central auditory system and processing of complex acoustic signals (pp. 127–138). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Ramsey, W. D. (2007). Representation reconsidered. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Ramsey, W. D. (2015). Must cognition be representational? Synthese, 1–18. doi: 10.1007/s11229-014-0644-6.
- Rupert, R. (2011). Review of Mark Rowlands, The new science of the mind: From extended mind to embodied phenomenology.Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 2011-03-35. Retrieved from Auguest 3, 2015. https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24671-the-new-science-of-the-mind-from-extended-mind-to-embodied-phenomenology/.
- Searle, J. (1992). The rediscovery of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Sporns, O. (2012). Networks of the brain: Discovering the human connectome. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Stotz, K., & Allen, C. (2011). From cell-surface receptors to higher learning: A whole world of experience. In K. S. Plaisance & T. A. C. Reydon (Eds.), Philosophy of behavioral biology, Boston studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 85–123). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- van Fraassen, B. (2002). The empirical stance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar