Download the full text in
PDF (169 kB)
Upshot: We agree with commenters that enactivism incorporates a broad variety of methodologies, metaphysical stances, concepts, and investigative approaches, and that this is a good thing. However, we remain concerned that autonomy and sense-making are problematic concepts for post-Varelian enactivism, and that they form the foundations of a conceptual framework that may hamper the development of effective explanations for cognitive activity, as well as the paradigmatic aspirations of this particular enactivist approach.
Harvey M. I., Gahrn-Andersen R. & Steffensen S. V. (2016) Authors’ response: Explanatory pluralism and precise conceptual development. Constructivist Foundations 11(2): 254–264. http://constructivist.info/11/2/254
To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.