Abstract
According to the embodied cognition hypothesis, the mental symbols used for higher cognitive reasoning, such as the making of deductive and inductive inferences, both originate and reside in our sensory-motor-introspective and emotional systems. The main objection to this view is that it cannot explain concepts that are, by definition, detached from perception and action, i.e., abstract concepts such as TRUTH or DEMOCRACY. This objection is usually merely taken for granted and has yet to be spelled out in detail. In this paper, I distinguish three different versions of this objection (one semantic and two epistemic versions). Once these distinctions are in place, we can begin to see the solutions offered in the literature in a new, more positive, light.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 161-185 |
| Journal | Philosophical Psychology |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 17 Feb 2019 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Funding
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft: [Grant Number GRK-2185/1].
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft | GRK-2185/1 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Embodied cognition and abstract concepts: Do concept empiricists leave anything out?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver