Slors Marc
Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Front Psychol. 2020 Apr 9;11:674. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00674. eCollection 2020.
Cognition is claimed to be extended by a wide array of items, ranging from notebooks to social institutions. Although the connection between individuals and these items is usually referred to as "coupling," the difference between notebooks and social institutions is so vast that the meaning of "coupling" is bound to be different in each of these cases. In this paper I argue that the radical difference between "artifact-extended cognition" and "socially extended cognition" is not sufficiently highlighted in the literature. I argue that there are two different senses of "cognitive extension" at play, that I shall label, respectively, "implementation extension" and "impact extension." Whereas implementation extension is a causal-functional notion, impact-extension hinges on social normativity that is connected with organization and action coordination. I will argue that the two kinds of cognitive extension are different enough to warrant separate labels. Because the most salient form of social extension of cognition involves the reciprocal co-constitution of cognitive capacities, I will propose to set it apart from other types of extended cognition by using the label "symbiotic cognition."
认知被认为可以通过从笔记本到社会制度等各种各样的事物得到扩展。尽管个体与这些事物之间的联系通常被称为“耦合”，但笔记本和社会制度之间的差异如此巨大，以至于“耦合”在每种情况下的含义必然不同。在本文中，我认为“人工制品扩展认知”和“社会扩展认知”之间的根本差异在文献中没有得到充分强调。我认为有两种不同意义上的“认知扩展”在起作用，我将分别将其标记为“实现扩展”和“影响扩展”。实现扩展是一个因果功能概念，而影响扩展则取决于与组织和行动协调相关的社会规范性。我将论证这两种认知扩展差异足够大，值得分别命名。由于认知的社会扩展最显著的形式涉及认知能力的相互共同构成，我将提议用“共生认知”这个标签将其与其他类型 的扩展认知区分开来。
