Skip to main content

Radicalizing the Phenomenology of Basic Minds with Levinas and Merleau-Ponty

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biology and Subjectivity

Part of the book series: Historical-Analytical Studies on Nature, Mind and Action ((HSNA,volume 2))

  • 423 Accesses

Abstract

The issue of minimal cognition or basic mentality concerns the elementary ingredients of cognitive processes. Within the larger discourse of enactive and embodied cognition, a current of research has emerged endorsing the radical proposal that basic minds neither represent nor compute, and, moreover, that the cognitive processes peculiar to them tend heavily (if not constitutively) to be both world-involving and to incorporate extra-neural bodily factors. Such a stance removes certain obstacles to a naturalistic view of basic minds and, at the same time, is more consistent with the idea of there being a deep continuity between life and mind. Here I suggest that the phenomenological tradition has resources for bolstering the case for radicalism about basic minds. Although the classical phenomenology of Husserl and Heidegger may be amenable to some form of representationalism, I propose a phenomenological corrective by appealing to the work of Levinas and Merleau-Ponty. Levinas ardently criticizes the representationalism of early phenomenology and places in its stead a non-representational account of “sensibility.” Merleau-Ponty, in addition, with his theory of (non-semantic) sense gives us a way of understanding basic minds synergistically, in terms of the perceiving organism’s embodied interactions with its surroundings, in a way supportive of the radical idea that basic minds are self-organizing dynamical systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Sure enough, radical enactivists like Hutto have a favorable attitude toward their autopoietic enactivist cousins (2011).

  2. 2.

    Even some who deny that representational explanations are necessary for certain basic cognitive processes (e.g., Orlandi 2014; Anderson 2014) allow that computation of some (non-classical, i.e., non-algorithmic) sort may nevertheless be involved in subpersonal cognitive processing.

  3. 3.

    I will use the phrase world-directedness instead of instead of intentional directedness due to the reticence of Heidegger and Levinas about the notion of intentionality.

  4. 4.

    See Drummond and Embree (1992) for a variety of viewpoints on the issue.

  5. 5.

    Though, that likely doesn’t entail for Husserl a wholesale commitment to the entire suite of vices characteristic classic GOFAI-style representationalism. See Yoshimi (2009).

  6. 6.

    Despite these critical remarks, the phenomenologies of Husserl and Heidegger are still full of valuable insights, even for the radical EEC project. See, e.g., Dotov et al. (2010). I think non-trivial amendments are needed to radicalize their theories of perception and understanding/interpretation, but those are amendments worth making. Elsewhere, I have made this case with respect to Husserl ’s phenomenology of perception (Bower 2014). I also think Heidegger ’s anti-representationalist interpreters have contributed helpfully to the same end .

References

  • Anderson, M. 2014. After phrenology: Neural reuse and the interactive brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barandiaran, X., and A. Moreno. 2006. On what makes certain dynamical systems cognitive. Adaptive Behavior 14(2): 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barandiaran, X., and A. Moreno. 2008. Adaptivity: From metabolism to behavior. Adaptive Behavior 16(5): 325–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, L. 2011. Beyond the brain: How body and environment shape animal and human minds. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, R. 1996. Toward the evolution of dynamical neural networks for minimally cognitive behavior. In From animals to animats 4: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior, ed. P. Maes, M. Mataric, J.A. Meyer, J. Pollack, and S. Wilson. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, R. 2003. The dynamics of active categorical perception in an evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior 11(4): 209–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bower, M. 2014. Affectively driven perception: Towards a non-representational phenomenology. Husserl Studies 30: 225–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R. 1991. Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence 47: 139–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmann, T., and E. Di Paolo. 2014. Non-representational sensorimotor knowledge. From Animals to Animats 13: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior, SAB 2014, LNAI 8575, 21–31. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burge, T. 1979. Individualism and the mental. In Midwest studies in philosophy, volume 4, metaphysics, ed. P. French, T. Uehling Jr., and H. Wettstein, 73–121. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carman, T. 2003. Heidegger’s analytic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chemero, A. 2001. What we perceive when we perceive affordances. Ecological Psychology 13: 111–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemero, A. 2003. An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology 15: 181–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemero, A. 2009. Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. 2008. Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., and J. Toribio. 1994. Doing without representing? Synthese 101: 401–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowell, S. 2013. Normativity and phenomenology in Husserl and Heidegger. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Di Paolo, E. 2005. Autopoiesis, adaptivity, teleology, agency. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4: 429–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Paolo, E. 2015. Interactive time-travel: On the intersubjective retro-modulation of intentions. Journal of Consciousness Studies 22(1–2): 49–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dotov, D. 2014. Putting reins on the brain: Hoe the body and environment use it. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8(795): 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dotov, D., L. Nie, and A. Chemero. 2010. A demonstration of the transition from readiness-to-hand to unreadiness-to-hand. PLoSOne 5: e9433. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, J. 1990. Husserlian intentionality and Non-foundational realism: Noema and object. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, J., and L. Embree (eds.). 1992. The phenomenology of the Noema. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S. 2014. In your face: Transcendence in embodied interaction. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8(495): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S. 2008. Direct perception in the intersubjective context. Consciousness and Cognition 17: 535–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S., and D. Hutto 2008. Primary interaction and narrative practice. The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity, 17–38, ed. J. Zlatev, T. Racine, C. Sinha, and E Itkonen. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. 1979. The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golob, S. 2013. Heidegger on assertion, method, and metaphysics. European Journal of Philosophy, Published Online doi:10.1111/ejop.12018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand, S. 2009. Emmanuel Levinas. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. 1962. Being and Time. Trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. 1995. In Fundamental problems of metaphysics: World, solitude, finitude, ed. W. McNeill and N. Walker. Bloomington: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, M. 2008. Material phenomenology. Trans. S. Davidson. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: First book. Trans. F. Kersten. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. 1983. Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy, First Book. Trans. F. Kersten. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. 1973. In Experience and judgment: Investigations in a genealogy of logic, ed. J.S. Churchill, K. Ameriks, and L. Eley. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. 1999. Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology. Trans. D. Cairns. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutto, D. 2008. Folk psychological narratives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutto, D. 2011. Philosophy of mind’s new lease on life: Autopoietic enactivism meets teleosemiotics. Journal of Consciousness Studies 18(5–6): 44–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutto, D., and E. Myin. 2013. Radicalizing enactivism: Basic minds without content. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. 1969. Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Trans. A. Lingis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. 1987. Collected philosophical papers. Trans. A. Linguis. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. 1991. Otherwise than being, or beyond essence. Trans. A. Lingis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. 1998. Entre nous: On thinking-of-the-other. Trans. M.B. Smith and B. Harshaw. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacAvoy, L. 2005. The other side of intentionality. Addressing Levinas, 109–118, ed. E.S. Nelson, A. Kapust, and K. Still. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marratto, S. 2012. The intercorporeal self: Merleau-Ponty on subjectivity. New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 1968. The visible and the invisible. Trans. A. Lingis. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 2003. Phenomenology of perception. Trans. C. Smith. New York: Routledge Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. 2010. Institution and passivity: Course notes from the Collège de France. Trans. L. Lawlor and H. Massey. Bloomington: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, D. 2014. What does Heidegger mean by the transcendence of Dasein? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 22(4): 491–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, M. 2011. The Cambridge introduction to Emmanuel Levinas. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, D. 2004. The sense of space. New York: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlandi, N. 2014. The innocent eye: Why vision is not a cognitive process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, H. 1975. The meaning of ‘meaning’. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7: 131–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeke, G., and G. Edelman. 1984. Selective networks and recognition automata. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 426(1): 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, M. 2010. The new science of the mind: From extended mind to embodied phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A.D. 2008. Husserl and externalism. Synthese 160: 313–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D.W., and R. McIntyre. 1984. Husserl and intentionality: A study of mind, meaning, and language. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, E., and L. Smith. 1994. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E. 2007. Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Duijn, M., F. Keijzer, and D. Franken. 2006. Principles of minimal cognition: Casting cognition as sensorimotor coordination. Adaptive Behavior 14: 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelder, T. 1995. What cognition might be, if not computation. The Journal of Philosophy 91(7): 345–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasseleu, C. 1998. Textures of light: vision and touch in Irigaray, Levinas, and Merleau-Ponty. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. 2004. Boundaries of the mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A., and S. Golonka. 2013. Embodied cognition is not what you think it is. Frontiers in Psychology 4(58): 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrathall, M. 2011. Heidegger and unconcealment: Truth, language, and history. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshimi, J. 2009. Husserl’s theory of belief and the Heideggerean critique. Husserl Studies 25: 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matt Bower .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bower, M. (2016). Radicalizing the Phenomenology of Basic Minds with Levinas and Merleau-Ponty. In: García-Valdecasas, M., Murillo, J., Barrett, N. (eds) Biology and Subjectivity. Historical-Analytical Studies on Nature, Mind and Action, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30502-8_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics