Abstract
A recent turn in the cognitive sciences has deepened the attention on embodied and situated dynamics for explaining different cognitive processes such as perception, emotion, and social cognition. This has fostered an extensive interest in the social and ‘intersubjective’ nature of moral behavior, especially from the perspective of enactivism. In this paper, I argue that embodied and situated perspectives, enactivism in particular, nonetheless require further improvements with regards to their analysis of the social nature of human morality. In brief, enactivist proposals still do not define what features of the social-relational context, or which kind of processes within social interactions, make an evaluation or action morally relevant or distinctive from other types of social normativity. As an alternative to this proclivity, and seeking to complement the enactive perspective, I present a definition of the process of moral sense-making and offer an empirically-based ethical distinction between different domains of social knowledge in moral development. For doing so, I take insights from the constructivist tradition in moral psychology. My objective is not to radically oppose embodied and enactive alternatives but to expand the horizon of their conceptual and empirical contributions to morality research.
Highlights
A recent turn in the cognitive sciences has deepened the interest in embodied and situated dynamics for explaining different cognitive processes such as perception, emotion, and social cognition (Varela et al 1991/2016; Prinz 2007; Gigerenzer 2008; Thompson 2010; Chemero 2011; Stewart et al 2014; Haidt 2013; Colombetti 2017; Shapiro 2019; Asma and Gabriel 2019)
I argue that these theories leave room to further define what features of the social-relational context, or which kind of processes within social interactions, make an evaluation or action morally relevant or distinctive from other types of social normativity
A recent turn in the cognitive sciences has deepened the interest in the intuitive nature of our moral behavior and the relevance of second-person interactions and intersubjectivity for explaining human morality (Varela 1999; Prinz 2007; Haidt 2013; Colombetti and Torrance 2009; Urban 2014, 2015; van Grunsven 2018; Bergmann and Wagner 2020)
Summary
A recent turn in the cognitive sciences has deepened the interest in embodied and situated dynamics for explaining different cognitive processes such as perception, emotion, and social cognition (Varela et al 1991/2016; Prinz 2007; Gigerenzer 2008; Thompson 2010; Chemero 2011; Stewart et al 2014; Haidt 2013; Colombetti 2017; Shapiro 2019; Asma and Gabriel 2019). Proponents of the enactive theory of cognition have highlighted the relevance of second-person interactions and intersubjectivity for properly explaining human morality These perspectives still face important challenges associated with their analysis of the social origins of human morality. I extend this contribution finishing with a pertinent reflection on the role of reasoning in human morality
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.