Intelligence involves intensionality: An explanatory issue for radical enactivism (again)

Synthese 200 (2):1-23 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

How can we explain the intelligence of behaviors? Radical enactivists maintain that intelligent behaviors can be explained without involving the attribution of representational contents. In this paper, I challenge this view by providing arguments showing that the intelligence of a behavior is reliant on ways of presenting the relative purpose and the environment in which that behavior is performed. This involves that a behavior is intelligent only if intesional contents are ascribed to the related agent. Importantly, this conclusion also concerns basic behaviors such as those related to the perception of affordances in the environment. Accordingly, either affordance-related behaviors are not instances of intelligent behaviors and can be accounted in a contentless way or affordance-related behaviors are intelligent, but cannot be accounted without involving contents and modes of presentation.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Phenomenological constraints: a problem for radical enactivism.Michael Roberts - 2018 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 17 (2):375-399.
Not-Quite-So Radical Enactivism.D. Lloyd - 2016 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (2):361-363.
Dreaming about Perceiving: A Challenge for Sensorimotor Enactivism.K. Loorits - 2017 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 24 (7-8):106-129.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-12

Downloads
47 (#339,873)

6 months
26 (#113,233)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?