论文部分内容阅读
在4E认知当中,由于体化认知、嵌入认知、生成认知和延展认知的内部差异,4E认知通常被区分为两大论题:因果性论题和构成性论题。从纵向来看,无论是因果性论题还是构成性论题都是对笛卡尔内在主义的反叛,其中因果性论题是对其拥有主张的反叛,而构成性论题是对其位置主张的反叛;但从横向来看,因果性论题和构成性论题存在根本性的差异,前者涉及的只是产生认知的原因,而后者则涉及产生认知的最小充分条件,在因果性与构成性的判定问题上,目前基于常识的判定、基于认知本质的判定和可操作性判定都存在一定的理论困难或适用局限,因果性与构成性的判定不仅需要认知标准的更为合理的说明,也需要经得起实践的检验。
In 4E cognition, the 4E cognition is usually divided into two major topics: the causal and the constructive topic due to the internal differences of the epistemic, the embedded, the cognitive and the extended cognition. From a vertical perspective, both causal and constitutive issues are rebellions against Descartes’ internalism, in which the causal argument is a rebellion against its own proposition and the constitutional thesis is a rebellion against its position proposition From a horizontal perspective, there are fundamental differences between causal and constructive topics. The former involves only the causes of cognition while the latter relates to the minimum and sufficient conditions for generating cognition. On the issues of causality and constitutional judgment, At present, judgments based on common sense, based on the cognitive nature of the judgments and maneuverability of judgments have some theoretical difficulties or applicable limitations, causal and constitutive judgments not only require a more reasonable description of cognitive standards, but also need to survive Practice testing.