Dynamics Without a Framework? Towards an Ecological-Enactive Approach to the Dynamical View of Metaphor

Barra lateral del artículo

PDF EPUB
Publicado: nov 6, 2019
Palabras clave:
ecological psychology, enactivism, dynamical systems, affordances, metaphor, philosophy of cognitive science

Contenido principal del artículo

John A Machielsen
Fontys University of Applied Sciences

Resumen

Recently several attempts were undertaken to unite the field of metaphor studies, trying to reconcile the conceptual/cognition and linguistic/discourse approaches to metaphor (Hampe 2017b). The dynamic view of metaphor espoused by amongst others Gibbs (2017a) as a way to unify the field of metaphor studies is said to converge on findings and theoretical predictions found in cognition and discourse approaches. The author argues this focus on dynamical models to explain the multi-scale socio-cognitive aspects of metaphor as an emergent phenomenon is not robust enough. Complexity and dynamical systems are merely a modelling technique to deploy theory for empirical testing of hypotheses; a dynamic view of metaphor needs a coherent background theory to base its dynamic modelling of metaphor in action on (Chemero, 2009). I argue that it can be successfully based on the ecological-enactive framework available within the modern paradigm of 4E cognitive science. This framework makes possible explanation of both 'lower' cognition and 'higher' cognition emerging in the interaction of an organism with its environment. In addition, I sketch how recent theoretical insights from ecological-enactivism (Baggs and Chemero 2018) concerning Gibson's notion of environment apply to the attempted unification of the field of metaphor studies. I close by suggesting how an understanding of metaphor as an ecological affordance of the socio-cultural environment can provide a rich basis for empirical hypotheses within a dynamical science of metaphor.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Machielsen, J. A. (2019). Dynamics Without a Framework? Towards an Ecological-Enactive Approach to the Dynamical View of Metaphor. Cultura, Lenguaje Y Representación, 22, 99–116. Recuperado a partir de https://www.e-revistes.uji.es/index.php/clr/article/view/3814
Número
Vol. 22 (2019): Metáfora y discurso / Metaphor and Discourse
Sección
ARTÍCULOS / ARTICLES

Se utiliza una licencia de derechos de autor CREATIVE COMMONS de acceso abierto.

Aquellos autores/as cuyos trabajos sean publicados por esta revista esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes:

  1. Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons CC BY SA que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación esta revista.
  2. Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
  3. Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, lo cual puede producir intercambios interesantes y aumentar las citas de la obra publicada.
Biografía del autor/a

John A Machielsen, Fontys University of Applied Sciences

Lecturer business ethics and creative industries

Citas

Anderson, M. L. (2014). After phrenology: neural reuse and the interactive brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Baggs, E., & Chemero, A. (2018). Radical embodiment in two directions. Synthese, 1-16.

—. (2019). “The third sense of environment”. In Wagman, J. B. & Blau, J. J. (Eds.) (2019), Perception as information detection: Reflections on Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Routledge.

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

Damasio, A. (2010). Self comes to mind: Constructing the conscious brain. New York: Pantheon.

Dewey, J. (1896). The reflex arc concept in psychology. Psychological review, 3(4), 357-370.

Di Paolo, E. A., & Thompson, E. (2014). “The enactive approach”. In Shapiro, L. (Ed.) (2014), The Routledge handbook of embodied cognition. New York: Routledge.

Dreyfus, H., & Kelly, S. D. (2007). Heterophenomenology: Heavy-handed sleight-of-hand. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6(1-2), 45-55.

Edelman, G. (1992). Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of the Mind. New York: Basic Books.

Friston, K., Kilner, J., & Harrison, L. (2006). A free energy principle for the brain. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 100(1-3), 70-87.

Gallagher, S. (2017). Enactivist interventions: Rethinking the mind. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Gibbs, R. W. (2017a). Metaphor Wars. Cambride, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

—. (2017b). “The embodied and discourse views of metaphor”. In Hampe, B. (Ed.) (2017a), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse.

—. (2017c). “Metaphor, language, and dynamical systems”. In Semino, E., & Demjén, Z. (Eds.) (2016), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Gibbs, R. W., & Cameron, L. (2008). The social-cognitive dynamics of metaphor performance. Cognitive Systems Research, 9(1-2), 64-75.

Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA: Houghton- Mifflin.

—. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

Hampe, B. (Ed.). (2017a). Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse. Cambride, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

—. (2017b). “Embodiment and Discourse”. In Hampe, B. (Ed.) (2017a), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse.

Heft, H. (2017). Perceptual information of “An entirely different order”: The “cultural environment” in The senses considered as perceptual systems. Ecological Psychology, 29(2), 122–145.

—. (2018). Places: Widening the scope of an ecological approach to perception-action with an emphasis on child development. Ecological Psychology, 30(1), 99-123.

Heras-Escribano, M. (2019). The Philosophy of Affordances. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Jensen, T. W. (2017). “Doing metaphor: An ecological perspective on metaphoricity in discourse”. In Hampe, B. (Ed.) (2017a), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse.

—. (2018). The world between us: The social affordances of metaphor in face-to-face interaction. RASK Internationalt tidsskrift for sprog og kommunikation, 47, 45-76.

Jensen, T. W., & Greve, L. (2019). Ecological cognition and metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(1), 1-16.

Johnson, M. (2017). Embodied mind, meaning, and reason: How our bodies give rise to understanding. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Kövecses, Z. (2015). Where metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in metaphor. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Philosophical papers volume 1. Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980/2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

—. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.

Machielsen, J. A. (2017). Metaphor in moral imagination: Enacting possible ways of moral action through embodied simulation. Unpublished Manuscript.

—. (2019). Metaphordances: A manifesto on the actual and possible. Manuscript in preparation.

Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition. The realization of the living. Boston, MA: D. Reidel.

McGann, M. (2014). Enacting a social ecology: Radically embodied intersubjectivity. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1321.

Müller, C. (2008). Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: A dynamic view. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Nöe, A. (2009). Out of our heads. New York: Hill and Wang.

Reed, E. S. (1988). James J. Gibson and the psychology of perception. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Reed, E. S., & Jones, R. (1982). Reasons for realism: Selected essays of James J. Gibson. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rietveld, E., & Kiverstein, J. (2014). A rich landscape of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 26(4), 325-352.

Schulkin, J. (2011). Adaptation and Well-Being. Social Allostasis. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Solymosi, T., & Shook, J. (2013). Neuropragmatism and the culture of inquiry: Moving beyond creeping Cartesianism. Intellectica, 60(2), 137-159.

Steen, G. J. (2011). The contemporary theory of metaphor: Now new and improved! Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 9(1), 24–64.

—. (2017). “Attention to metaphor”. In Hampe, B. (Ed.) (2017a), Metaphor: Embodied cognition and discourse.

Tucker, D. M. (2007). Mind from Body: Experience from Neural Structure. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Van Dijk, L., & Rietveld, E. (2017). Foregrounding sociomaterial practice in our understanding of affordances. Frontiers in Psychology, 7-1969, 12.

Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Withagen, R., Araújo, D., & de Poel, H. J. (2017). Inviting affordances and agency. New Ideas in Psychology, 45, 11-18.