Abstract
AbstractIn this paper I defend the epistemic value of the representational-computational view of cognition by arguing that it has explanatory merits that cannot be ignored. To this end, I focus on the virtue of a computational explanation of optic ataxia, a disorder characterized by difficulties in executing visually-guided reaching tasks, although ataxic patients do not exhibit any specific disease of the muscular apparatus. I argue that addressing cases of patients who are suffering from optic ataxia by invoking a causal role for internal representations is more effective than merely relying on correlations between bodily and environmental variables. This argument has consequences for the epistemic assessment of radical enactivism, whichRE invokes the Dynamical System Theory as the best tool for explaining cognitive phenomena.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference78 articles.
1. Andersen, R. A., & Buneo, C. A. (2003). Sensorimotor integration in posterior parietal cortex. Advances in Neurology, 93, 159–177.
2. Balint, R. (1909). Seelenlahmung des. Monatsschr Psychiatr Neurol, 25, 51–81.
3. Bechtel, W., & Richardson, R. C. (1993). Discovering complexity decomposition and localization as strategies in scientific research. Princeton.
4. Beer, (2000). Dynamical approaches to cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(3), 91–99.
5. Blangero, A., Ota, H., Rossetti, Y., Fujii, T., Ohtake, H., Tabuchi, M., et al. (2010). Systematic retinotopic reaching error vectors in unilateral optic ataxia. Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 46(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2009.02.015.