Review of Philosophy and Psychology

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 1–13 | Cite as

Embodying the Mind and Representing the Body

  • Adrian John Tetteh Alsmith
  • Frédérique de Vignemont
Article

Abstract

Does the existence of body representations undermine the explanatory role of the body? Or do certain types of representation depend so closely upon the body that their involvement in a cognitive task implicates the body itself? In the introduction of this special issue we explore lines of tension and complement that might hold between the notions of embodiment and body representations, which remain too often neglected or obscure. To do so, we distinguish two conceptions of embodiment that either put weight on the explanatory role of the body itself or body representations. We further analyse how and to what extent body representations can be said to be embodied. Finally, we give an overview of the full volume articulated around foundational issues (How should we define the notion of embodiment? To what extent and in what sense is embodiment compatible with representationalism? To what extent and in what sense are sensorimotor approaches similar to behaviourism?) and their applications in several cognitive domains (perception, concepts, selfhood, social cognition).

References

  1. Adams, F., and K. Aizawa. 2001. The bounds of cognition. Philosophical Psychology 14(1): 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, F., and K. Aizawa. 2008. The bounds of cognition. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Arzy, S., G. Thut, C. Mohr, C.M. Michel, and O. Blanke. 2006. Neural basis of embodiment: Distinct contributions of temporoparietal junction and extrastriate body area. The Journal of Neuroscience 26(31): 8074–8081. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0745-06.2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ballard, D.H., M.M. Hayhoe, P.K. Pook, and R.P. Rao. 1997. Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20(4): 723–742.Google Scholar
  5. Barsalou, L.W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 577–609.Google Scholar
  6. Bayne, T. 2010. Agentive experiences as pushmi-pullyu representations. In J. Aguilar, A. Buckareff and K. Frankish (eds.) New Waves in the Philosophy of Action. Palgrave Macmillan, 219–36.Google Scholar
  7. Beer, R.D. 2009. Beyond control: The dynamics of brain-body-environment interaction in motor systems. In Progress in motor control, vol. 629, ed. D. Sternad, 7–24. US: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Block, N. 2007. Review of Alva Noë, Action in perception. In Consciousness, function, and representation: Collected papers, vol. 1, ed. N. Block, 363–375. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  9. Brooks, R.A. 1991. Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence 47(1–3): 139–159. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(91)90053-m.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chatterjee, A. 2010. Disembodying cognition. Language and Cognition 2(1): 79–116. doi:10.1515/langcog.2010.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chemero, T. 2009. Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  12. Churchland, P.S., V.S. Ramachandran, and T.S. Sejnowski. 1994. A critique of pure vision. In Large/scale neuronal theories of the brain, ed. C. Koch and J. Davis, 231–244. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, A. 1989. Microcognition: Philosophy, cognitive science, and parallel distributed processing. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  14. Clark, A. 1997. Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, A. 2008a. Embodiment and explanation. In Handbook of cognitive science. An embodied approach, ed. P. Calvo and A. Gomila, 41–58. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark, A. 2008b. Pressing the flesh: A tension in the study of the embodied, embedded mind? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76(1): 37–59. doi:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00114.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark, A. 2008c. Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Clark, A. 2009. Spreading the joy? why the machinery of consciousness is (probably) still in the head. Mind 118: 963–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clark, A., and D. Chalmers. 1998. The extended mind. Analysis 58: 10–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Clark, A., and R. Grush. 1999. Towards a cognitive robotics. Adaptive Behavior 7(1): 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cussins, A. 1990. The connectionist construction of concepts. In The philosophy of artificial intelligence, ed. M.A. Boden, 368–440. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Davidson, P.R., and D.M. Wolpert. 2005. Widespread access to predictive models in the motor system: A short review. Journal of Neural Engineering 2: S313–S319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. de Vignemont, F. 2010. Body schema and body image–pros and cons. Neuropsychologia 48: 669–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dempsey, L. & Shani, I. (forthcoming). Stressing the flesh: In defence of strong embodied cognition. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.Google Scholar
  25. Dennett, D.C. 1996. Kinds of minds. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Desmurget, M., and S. Grafton. 2000. Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(11): 423–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eliasmith, C. 2008. Dynamics, control and cognition. In Cambridge handbook of situated cognition, ed. P. Robbins and M. Aydede, 134–154. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Evans, G. 1982. The varieties of reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Gallagher, S. 2005a. Dynamic models of body schematic processes. In Body image and body schema: Interdisciplinary perspectives on the body, ed. H. De Preester and V. Knockaert, 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  30. Gallagher, S. 2005b. How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gallagher, S. 2008. Are minimal representations still representations? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 16(3): 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gallese, V., and G. Lakoff. 2005. The Brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22(3–4): 455–479. doi:10.1080/02643290442000310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gallese, V., and C. Sinigaglia. 2010. The bodily self as power for action. Neuropsychologia 48(3): 746–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gallese, V., and C. Sinigaglia. 2011. What is so special about embodied simulation? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15(11): 512–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Glenberg, A. 1997. What memory is for. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20(1): 1–19.Google Scholar
  36. Glenberg, A. 2010. Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 1(4): 586–596. doi:10.1002/wcs.55.Google Scholar
  37. Goldin-Meadow, S. 1999. The role of gesture in communication and thinking. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3(11): 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Goldman, A., and F. de Vignemont. 2009. Is social cognition embodied? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(4): 154–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Grush, R. 1998. Skill and spatial content. Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy 6.Google Scholar
  40. Grush, R. 2003. In defense of some ‘Cartesian’ assumptions concerning the brain and its operation. Biology and Philosophy 18: 53–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Grush, R. 2004. The emulation theory of representation: Motor control, imagery, and perception. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27: 377–396.Google Scholar
  42. Hesslow, G. 2002. Conscious thought as simulation of behaviour and perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6(6): 242–247. doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01913-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Humberstone, I.L., 1992. Direction of fit. Mind, 101(401): 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hurley, S.L. 2010. Varieties of externalism. In The extended mind, ed. R. Menary, 101–154. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  45. Jacob, P. (this volume) Embodying the mind by extending it.Google Scholar
  46. Jacob, P., and M. Jeannerod. 2003. Ways of seeing: The scope and limits of visual cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Jeannerod, M. 1997. The cognitive neuroscience of action. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  48. Jeannerod, M. 2006. Motor cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kelso, J.A.S. 1995. Dynamic patterns: The self-organisation of brain and behaviour. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  50. Kelso, J.A.S. 2002. The complementary nature of coordination dynamics: Self-organization and agency. Nonlinear Phenomena in Complex Systems 4: 364–371.Google Scholar
  51. Kinsbourne, M. 1995. Awareness of one’s own body: An attentional theory of its nature, development, and brain basis. In The body and the self, ed. J.L. Bermúdez, A. Marcel, and N. Eilan, 205–223. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  52. Kinsbourne, M. 2002. The brain and body awareness. In Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice, ed. T.F. Cash and T. Pruzinsky, 22–39. New York: Guildford.Google Scholar
  53. Kosslyn, S.M., N.M. Alpert, W.L. Thompson, V. Maljkovic, S.B. Weise, C.F. Chabris, and F.S. Buonanno. 1993. Visual mental imagery activates topographically-organized visual cortex: PET investigations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 5: 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lakoff, G., and M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  55. Latash, M. 2008. Neurophysiological basis of movement. Champaign: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
  56. Mahon, B., and A. Caramazza. 2005. The orchestration of the sensory-motor systems: Clues from neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22: 480–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mandik, P. 2005. Action-oriented representation. In Cognition and the brain: The philosophy and neuroscience movement, ed. A. Brook and K. Akins, 284–305. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Marasco, P.D., K. Kim, J.E. Colgate, M.A. Peshkin, and T.A. Kuiken. 2011. Robotic touch shifts perception of embodiment to a prosthesis in targeted reinnervation amputees. Brain 134(3): 747–758. doi:10.1093/brain/awq361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Menary, R. 2010. Cognitive integration and the extended mind. In The extended mind, ed. R. Menary, 227–244. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  60. Merleau-Ponty, M. 1945/1962. Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  61. Meteyard, L., S.R. Cuadrado, B. Bahrami, and G. Vigliocco. 2012. Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics. Cortex. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2010.11.002.
  62. Metzinger, T. 2003. Being no one: The self-model theory of subjectivity. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  63. Miall, R.C., and D.M. Wolpert. 1996. Forward models for physiological motor control. Neural Networks 9(8): 1265–1279. doi:10.1016/s0893-6080(96)00035-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Millikan, R.G. 1995. Pushmi-pullyu representations. Philosophical Perspectives 9: 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Newport, R., R. Pearce, and C. Preston. 2010. Fake hands in action: Embodiment and control of supernumerary limbs. Experimental Brain Research 204(3): 385–395. doi:10.1007/s00221-009-2104-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. O'Brien, G., and J. Opie. 2004. Notes toward a structuralist theory of mental representation. In Representation in mind: New approaches to mental representation, ed. H. Clapin, P. Staines, and P. Slezak, 1–20. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  67. Ostry, D., and A. Feldman. 2003. A critical evaluation of the force control hypothesis in motor control. Experimental Brain Research 153(3): 275–288. doi:10.1007/s00221-003-1624-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pezzulo, G., Barsalou, L. W., Cangelosi, A., Fischer, M. H., Spivey, M., and McRae, K. (2011). The mechanics of embodiment: A dialogue on embodiment and computational modeling. [Original research]. Frontiers in Psychology 2. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00005
  69. Port, R. F., and van Gelder, T. (Eds.). 1995. Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  70. Prinz, J. 2009. Is consciousness embodied? In The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition, ed. P. Robbins and M. Aydede, 419–437. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Rowlands, M. 2006. Body language: Representation in action. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  72. Shapiro, L.A. 2010. Embodied cognition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  73. Smith, B.C. 1996. On the origin of objects. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  74. Sutton, J. 2010. Exograms and interdisciplinarity: History, the extended mind, and the civilizing process. In The extended mind, ed. R. Menary, 189–226. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  75. Thagard, P. 2005. Mind: Introduction to cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  76. Thelen, E., and L.B. Smith. 1994. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  77. Turvey, M.T. 1990. Coordination. American Psychologist 45: 938–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Turvey, M.T., and C. Carello. 1995. Some dynamical themes in perception and action. In Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition, ed. R. Port and T. Van Gelder, 373–401. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  79. Van Gelder, T. 1995. What might cognition be, if not computation? The Journal of Philosophy 92(7): 345–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Varela, F.J., E. Thompson, and E. Rosch. 1991. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  81. Wexler, M., S.M. Kosslyn, and A. Berthoz. 1998. Motor processes in mental rotation. Cognition 68(77–94).Google Scholar
  82. Wheeler, M. 2005. Reconstructing the cognitive world: The next step. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  83. Wilson, M. 2002. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9(4): 625–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wilson, R.A. 2004. Boundaries of the mind: The individual in the fragile sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Wilson, R., and Foglia, L. (2011). Embodied cognition. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2011 edition), ed. E. N. Zalta. Retrieved from <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/embodied-cognition/>.
  86. Wolpert, D.M., and Z. Ghahramani. 2000. Computational principles of movement neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience 3: 1212–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adrian John Tetteh Alsmith
    • 1
  • Frédérique de Vignemont
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Subjectivity Research (cfs.ku.dk)University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Institut Jean Nicod, CNRS–ENS–EHESSParisFrance

Personalised recommendations