Volume 17 · Number 2 · Pages 150–152
Can There Be a Unified 5E Theory of Pain?

Juan Diego Bogotá & Giovanna Colombetti

Log in download the full text in PDF

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Open peer commentary on the article “Kaleidoscope of Pain: What and How Do You See Through It” by Maja Smrdu. Abstract: We agree with Smrdu that pain cannot be reduced to a neurophysiological event and we welcome a (micro-)phenomenological investigation of pain experience. However, we do not think such an investigation can provide sufficient support for either a 5E theory of pain, or (just) an enactive one. A 5E theory of pain would require a clarification of how the 5Es fit together. An enactive account would require a “circulation” between first- and third-person data.


Bogotá J. D. & Colombetti G. (2022) Can there be a unified 5e theory of pain? Constructivist Foundations 17(2): 150–152. https://constructivist.info/17/2/150

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


Colombetti G. (2013) Some ideas for the integration of neurophenomenology and affective neuroscience. Constructivist Foundations 8(3): 288–297. https://constructivist.info/8/3/288
Colombetti G. (2014) The feeling body: Affective science meets the enactive mind. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. Reviewed in. https://constructivist.info/10/2/274
Colombetti G. (2017) Enactive affectivity, extended. Topoi 36(3): 445–455. https://cepa.info/5681
Cosmelli D., David O., Lachaux J.-P., Martinerie J., Garnero L., Renault B. & Varela F. J. (2004) Waves of consciousness: Ongoing cortical patterns during binocular rivalry. Neuroimage 23: 128–140. https://cepa.info/7750
Di Paolo E. A. (2009) Extended life. Topoi 28: 9–21. https://cepa.info/322
Lutz A. (2002) Toward a neurophenomenology as an account of generative passages: A first empirical case study. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1(2): 133–167. https://cepa.info/5021
Newen A., De Bruin L. & Gallagher S. (2018) 4E cognition: Historical roots, key concepts, and central issues. In: Newen A., De Bruin L. & Gallagher S. (eds.) The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 3–15. https://cepa.info/5575
Stilwell P. & Harman K. (2019) An enactive approach to pain: Beyond the biopsychosocial model. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 18(4): 637–665. https://cepa.info/6925
Thompson E. (2007) Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. Reviewed in. https://constructivist.info/3/2/117
Thompson E. (2018) Review of Daniel D. Hutto and Erik Myin, Evolving enactivism: Basic minds meet content. In: Notre Dame philosophical reviews. https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/evolving-enactivism-basic-minds-meet-content/
Varela F. J. (1996) Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy to the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3(4): 330–349. https://cepa.info/1893
Varela F. J. (1999) The specious present: The neurophenomenology of time consciousness. In: Petitot J., Varela F. J., Pachoud B. & Roy J. M. (eds.) Naturalizing phenomenology: Issues in contemporary phenomenology and cognitive science. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA: 266–314. https://cepa.info/2081
Varela F. J., Thompson E. & Rosch E. (1991) The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wheeler M. (2010) Minds, things and materiality. In: Malafouris L. & Renfrew C. (eds.) The cognitive life of things: Recasting the boundaries of the mind. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge: 29–37. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 0

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