Volume 14 · Number 1 · Pages 22–25
A Different Vocabulary, or a Different Metaphor?

Ema Demšar & Urban Kordeš

Download the full text in
PDF (108 kB)

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Open peer commentary on the article “Decentering the Brain: Embodied Cognition and the Critique of Neurocentrism and Narrow-Minded Philosophy of Mind” by Shaun Gallagher. Abstract: In agreement with Gallagher’s call to re-examine the standard neurocentric view, we situate the target article within constructivist epistemology. We point to certain similarities between E-approaches to cognition (in particular predictive processing accounts) and constructivist ideas originating from the tradition of second-order cybernetics, demonstrating the potential for a productive dialogue between contemporary cognitive science and constructivist theory. Further elaborating Gallagher’s proposal, we suggest an alternative, autopoiesis-based metaphor of the mind.


Demšar E. & Kordeš U. (2018) A different vocabulary, or a different metaphor? Constructivist Foundations 14(1): 22–25. http://constructivist.info/14/1/022

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)


Allen M. & Friston K. J. (2018) From cognitivism to autopoiesis: Towards a computational framework for the embodied mind. Synthese 195(6): 2459–2482 http://cepa.info/4099
Clark A. (2015) Radical predictive processing. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 53 (S1): 3–27. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Clark A. (2017) How to knit your own Markov blanket: Resisting the second law with metamorphic minds. In: Metzinger T. & Wiese W. (eds.) Philosophy and predictive processing: 1. MIND Group, Frankfurt am Main: 1–19. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Foerster H. von (2003) Ethics and second-order cybernetics. In: Foerster H. von, Understanding understanding. Springer, New York: 287–304. Originally published in: Ray Y. & Prieur B. (eds.) (1991) Systèmes, ethique, perspectives en thérapie familiale. ESF editeur, Paris: 41–55 http://cepa.info/1742
Friston K. J. (2013) Life as we know it. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 10(86): 20130475. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Gallagher S. & Allen M. (2018) Active inference, enactivism and the hermeneutics of social cognition. Synthese 195(6): 2627–2648 http://cepa.info/4222
Glasersfeld E. von (1984) An introduction to radical constructivism. In: Watzlawick P. (ed.) The invented reality: How do we know what we believe we know? Contributions to constructivism. Norton, New York: 17–40. German original published in 1981 http://cepa.info/1279
Glasersfeld E. von (1988) The reluctance to change a way of thinking. Irish Journal of Psychology 9(1): 83–90 http://cepa.info/1401
Hohwy J. (2016) The self-evidencing brain. Noûs 50: 259–285. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Hohwy J. (2017) How to entrain your evil demon. In: Metzinger T. & Wiese W. (eds.) Philosophy and predictive processing: 1. MIND Group, Frankfurt am Main: 1–15. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kirchhoff M., Parr T., Palacios E., Friston K. & Kiverstein J. (2018) The Markov blankets of life: Autonomy, active inference and the free energy principle. Journal of The Royal Society Interface 15(138): 20170792 http://cepa.info/5393
Maturana H. & Varela F. J. (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Reidel, Boston. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Riegler A. (2001) Towards a radical constructivist understanding of science. Foundations of Science 6(1–3): 1–30 http://cepa.info/1860
Varela F. J., Maturana H. R. & Uribe R. (1974) Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. Biosystems 5(4): 187–196 http://cepa.info/546
Vörös S., Froese T. & Riegler A. (2016) Epistemological Odyssey: Introduction to the special issue on the diversity of enactivism and neurophenomenology. Constructivist Foundations 11(2): 189–204 http://constructivist.info/11/2/189

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.