Embodied Imagination: Lakoff and Johnson’s Experientialist View of Conceptual Understanding

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Review of General Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-02 DOI:10.1177/10892680231224400
Kevin M. Clark
{"title":"Embodied Imagination: Lakoff and Johnson’s Experientialist View of Conceptual Understanding","authors":"Kevin M. Clark","doi":"10.1177/10892680231224400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reviews an embodied or experientialist view of conceptual understanding. It focuses on George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s theory of embodied cognition and its framing of human conceptualization and reasoning in terms of embodied imagination. These ideas are summarized as ten basic claims: (a) objectivist assumptions are problematic; (b) many human categories have non-classical structure; (c) conceptual systems consist of cognitive models; (d) thinking utilizes frames, metonymies, and prototypes; (e) metaphor is prevalent and primarily conceptual; (f) image schemas structure our experiences; (g) the mind is embodied; (h) abstract thought is largely metaphorical; (i) truth is relative to embodied understanding; and (j) philosophy should be empirically responsible. Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of embodied cognition offers a view of conceptual understanding that is cognitively realistic (or empirically responsible), biologically plausible, and self-critical, while providing adequate theories of meaning and truth grounded in embodied experience.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680231224400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reviews an embodied or experientialist view of conceptual understanding. It focuses on George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s theory of embodied cognition and its framing of human conceptualization and reasoning in terms of embodied imagination. These ideas are summarized as ten basic claims: (a) objectivist assumptions are problematic; (b) many human categories have non-classical structure; (c) conceptual systems consist of cognitive models; (d) thinking utilizes frames, metonymies, and prototypes; (e) metaphor is prevalent and primarily conceptual; (f) image schemas structure our experiences; (g) the mind is embodied; (h) abstract thought is largely metaphorical; (i) truth is relative to embodied understanding; and (j) philosophy should be empirically responsible. Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of embodied cognition offers a view of conceptual understanding that is cognitively realistic (or empirically responsible), biologically plausible, and self-critical, while providing adequate theories of meaning and truth grounded in embodied experience.
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
体现想象力:拉科夫和约翰逊的经验主义概念理解观
本文回顾了关于概念理解的具身或经验主义观点。文章重点论述了乔治-拉科夫和马克-约翰逊的具身认知理论,以及他们从具身想象力的角度对人类概念化和推理的构思。这些观点归纳为十项基本主张:(a) 客观主义假设是有问题的;(b) 许多人类范畴具有非经典结构;(c) 概念系统由认知模型组成;(d) 思维利用框架、隐喻和原型;(e) 隐喻是普遍存在的,而且主要是概念性的;(f) 形象图式构造了我们的经验;(g) 思维是具身的;(h) 抽象思维在很大程度上是隐喻性的;(i) 真理是相对于具身理解而言的;(j) 哲学应该对经验负责。拉科夫和约翰逊的具身认知理论为概念理解提供了一种认知现实(或经验负责)、生物合理和自我批判的观点,同时提供了以具身体验为基础的意义和真理的适当理论。
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
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Relational Ontology in the Mapuche Thinking: Possibilities for Indigenous Well-Being Amidst Colonial Settings Education and Training: Professional The 4D Model of American Political Conservatism: Disgust, Disorder Aversion, Deontology, and (Social) Dominance The Kokoro in Japanese Spiritual Care Antiracist Psychology to Advance Equitable Public Policy
×
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