现象透明度与认知边界

IF 2 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences Pub Date : 2024-08-29 DOI:10.1007/s11097-024-10025-8
Julian Hauser, Hadeel Naeem
{"title":"现象透明度与认知边界","authors":"Julian Hauser, Hadeel Naeem","doi":"10.1007/s11097-024-10025-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Phenomenal transparency was once widely believed to be necessary for cognitive extension. Recently, this claim has come under attack, with a new consensus coalescing around the idea that transparency is neither necessary for internal nor extended cognitive processes. We take these recent critiques as an opportunity to refine the concept of transparency relevant for cognitive extension. In particular, we highlight that transparency concerns an agent's employment of a resource – and that employment is compatible with an agent consciously apprehending (or attending to) a resource. This means it is possible for an object to be transparent and opaque to an agent, even at a single moment time. Once we understand transparency in this way, the detractors' claims lose their bite, and existing arguments for transparency's necessity for cognitive extension return to apply with full force.</p>","PeriodicalId":51504,"journal":{"name":"Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Phenomenal transparency and the boundary of cognition\",\"authors\":\"Julian Hauser, Hadeel Naeem\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11097-024-10025-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Phenomenal transparency was once widely believed to be necessary for cognitive extension. Recently, this claim has come under attack, with a new consensus coalescing around the idea that transparency is neither necessary for internal nor extended cognitive processes. We take these recent critiques as an opportunity to refine the concept of transparency relevant for cognitive extension. In particular, we highlight that transparency concerns an agent's employment of a resource – and that employment is compatible with an agent consciously apprehending (or attending to) a resource. This means it is possible for an object to be transparent and opaque to an agent, even at a single moment time. Once we understand transparency in this way, the detractors' claims lose their bite, and existing arguments for transparency's necessity for cognitive extension return to apply with full force.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-024-10025-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-024-10025-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们曾经普遍认为,现象透明度是认知扩展的必要条件。最近,这一说法受到了抨击,新的共识围绕着这样一个观点展开,即透明度既不是内部认知过程的必要条件,也不是扩展认知过程的必要条件。我们以最近的这些批评为契机,完善与认知扩展相关的透明度概念。我们特别强调,透明度涉及一个代理对资源的利用--这种利用与代理有意识地理解(或关注)资源是一致的。这意味着,即使在同一时刻,一个物体对一个代理来说既透明又不透明也是可能的。一旦我们以这种方式理解了透明度,诋毁者的论点就失去了说服力,而现有的关于透明度对认知延伸的必要性的论证又重新发挥了充分的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Phenomenal transparency and the boundary of cognition

Phenomenal transparency was once widely believed to be necessary for cognitive extension. Recently, this claim has come under attack, with a new consensus coalescing around the idea that transparency is neither necessary for internal nor extended cognitive processes. We take these recent critiques as an opportunity to refine the concept of transparency relevant for cognitive extension. In particular, we highlight that transparency concerns an agent's employment of a resource – and that employment is compatible with an agent consciously apprehending (or attending to) a resource. This means it is possible for an object to be transparent and opaque to an agent, even at a single moment time. Once we understand transparency in this way, the detractors' claims lose their bite, and existing arguments for transparency's necessity for cognitive extension return to apply with full force.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
8.70%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences is an interdisciplinary, international journal that serves as a forum to explore the intersections between phenomenology, empirical science, and analytic philosophy of mind. The journal represents an attempt to build bridges between continental phenomenological approaches (in the tradition following Husserl) and disciplines that have not always been open to or aware of phenomenological contributions to understanding cognition and related topics. The journal welcomes contributions by phenomenologists, scientists, and philosophers who study cognition, broadly defined to include issues that are open to both phenomenological and empirical investigation, including perception, emotion, language, and so forth. In addition the journal welcomes discussions of methodological issues that involve the variety of approaches appropriate for addressing these problems.    Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences also publishes critical review articles that address recent work in areas relevant to the connection between empirical results in experimental science and first-person perspective.Double-blind review procedure The journal follows a double-blind reviewing procedure. Authors are therefore requested to place their name and affiliation on a separate page. Self-identifying citations and references in the article text should either be avoided or left blank when manuscripts are first submitted. Authors are responsible for reinserting self-identifying citations and references when manuscripts are prepared for final submission.
期刊最新文献
How preferences enslave attention: calling into question the endogenous/exogenous dichotomy from an active inference perspective Interpersonal scaffoldings for shared emotions: how social interaction supports emotional sharing Enactivism: a newish name for mostly old ideas? Violence in mass-mediated images and memory. Phenomenological account of prosthetic memories Precis of Certainty in Action
×
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