The Locus of Agency in Extended Cognitive Systems

IF 1.2 2区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Journal for General Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2023-12-09 DOI:10.1007/s10838-023-09666-1
Barbara Tomczyk
{"title":"The Locus of Agency in Extended Cognitive Systems","authors":"Barbara Tomczyk","doi":"10.1007/s10838-023-09666-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The increasing popularity of artificial cognitive enhancements raises the issue of their impact on the agent’s personal autonomy, and issues pertaining to how the latter is to be secured. The <i>extended mind</i> thesis implies that mental states responsible for autonomous action can be partly constituted by the workings of cognitive artifacts themselves, and the question then arises of whether this commits one to embracing an <i>extended agent</i> thesis. My answer is negative. After briefly presenting the main accounts on the conditions for autonomous agency, and analyzing how the latter can be protected from threats posed by the use of cognitive artifacts, I argue that autonomous agency is essentially tied to conscious experience and intentionality, which in turn can only be attributed to the human part of any extended cognitive system. I present both theoretical (conceptual) and practical arguments against recognizing the entire extended system, composed of one human and an artifact, as an autonomous agent.</p>","PeriodicalId":44953,"journal":{"name":"Journal for General Philosophy of Science","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for General Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-023-09666-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The increasing popularity of artificial cognitive enhancements raises the issue of their impact on the agent’s personal autonomy, and issues pertaining to how the latter is to be secured. The extended mind thesis implies that mental states responsible for autonomous action can be partly constituted by the workings of cognitive artifacts themselves, and the question then arises of whether this commits one to embracing an extended agent thesis. My answer is negative. After briefly presenting the main accounts on the conditions for autonomous agency, and analyzing how the latter can be protected from threats posed by the use of cognitive artifacts, I argue that autonomous agency is essentially tied to conscious experience and intentionality, which in turn can only be attributed to the human part of any extended cognitive system. I present both theoretical (conceptual) and practical arguments against recognizing the entire extended system, composed of one human and an artifact, as an autonomous agent.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
扩展认知系统中的代理中心
人工认知增强技术的日益普及提出了一个问题,即它们对代理人个人自主性的影响,以及如何确保后者的问题。扩展心智论意味着,自主行动的心理状态可以部分地由认知人工智能本身的运作构成,那么问题就来了,这是否意味着我们必须接受扩展代理论。我的回答是否定的。在简要介绍了关于自主能动性条件的主要论述,并分析了如何保护自主能动性免受认知人工制品的威胁之后,我认为自主能动性本质上与有意识的经验和意向性相关联,而有意识的经验和意向性又只能归因于任何扩展认知系统的人类部分。我从理论(概念)和实践两方面论证了反对将由人类和人工制品组成的整个扩展系统视为自主代理的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal for General Philosophy of Science
Journal for General Philosophy of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal for General Philosophy of Science is a forum for the discussion of a variety of attitudes concerning the philosophy of science. It has as its subject matter the philosophical, especially methodological, ontological, epistemological, anthropological, and ethical foundations of the individual sciences. Particular emphasis is laid on bringing both the natural, the cultural, and the technical sciences into a philosophical context, within which the historical presuppositions and conditions of the current problems of the philosophy of science are also included in the discussion. The Journal for General Philosophy of Science has been successful in its attempt to serve as a forum that bridges the gap between the different sciences, especially the natural, cultural, and social sciences. One of its purposes is to discuss and contrast the common as well as the different specific methodological and philosophical foundations of the individual sciences, taking into account all currently relevant positions of the philosophy of science. In recent years considerable insight has been gained into the problems of current philosophy of science by considering the historical dimension of the sciences. This is why more intensive efforts will be made in the future towards the integration of historical and systematic considerations. The journal contains:articles discussions reports on the state of the philosophy of science in individual countries reviews a bibliography of the major journals in the field of the history and philosophy of science. The journal is of interest to philosophers, especially philosophers of science, as well as to scholars from the field of the natural, cultural, social and technical sciences who are interested in becoming aware of the philosophical implications of their disciplines and in being stimulated by the transfer of methods, leading ideas, concepts and theories from other fields. As of 2015, Journal for General Philosophy of Science will accept submissions online via the Editorial Manager system.  Authors are encouraged to use this format in submitting to the journal to ensure that your article is processed in a timely fashion.
期刊最新文献
Induction and the Principles of Love in Francis Bacon’s Philosophy of Nature Back to Reichenbach Deep Learning-Aided Research and the Aim-of-Science Controversy On Semirealism, Realism More Generally, and Underlying Epistemic Stances The Evolution of the Bell Notion of Beable: From Bohr to Primitive Ontology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1