Authors’ Response: Explanatory Pluralism and Precise Conceptual Development

Constructivist Foundations 11 (2):254-264 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Upshot: We agree with commenters that enactivism incorporates a broad variety of methodologies, metaphysical stances, concepts, and investigative approaches, and that this is a good thing. However, we remain concerned that autonomy and sense-making are problematic concepts for post-Varelian enactivism, and that they form the foundations of a conceptual framework that may hamper the development of effective explanations for cognitive activity, as well as the paradigmatic aspirations of this particular enactivist approach.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,225

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Enaction, and Its Relation to Science in an Objective Key.F. Cummins - 2016 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (2):245-246.
Phenomenological Teleology and Human Interactivity.R. Gahrn-Andersen & M. I. Harvey - 2016 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (2):224-226.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-03-17

Downloads
22 (#971,181)

6 months
22 (#135,814)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references