Talk:Enactivism

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of mind

Cognitive science Stub‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cognitive science, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cognitive scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Cognitive scienceTemplate:WikiProject Cognitive scienceCognitive science articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I'd like to include some more content from The Embodied Mind and also discuss the relationship of enactivism to embodiment and artificial intelligence.

Sjackisch (talk) 00:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why's Martin Heidegger not referenced, anyone? KTyson (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heidegger has focused a lot less on the body than Merleau-Ponty, who combined Heiggerian ideas with his focus on the body. That might be the reason. --Andreasvc (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology / Philosophy

Is there a way to change the page title for this article? I feel that "Enactivism" or "Enactivism (Philosophy)" would be much more accurate. I am going to try expanding this article with correct citations at some point, then adding it to the philosophy portal. (Epavlica (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Not Clear - Needs a Re-write

Part of the point of an encyclopedia is to explain concepts to layman. This appears to be written by someone which does not have a good understanding of the topic and is therefore full of jargon and not explained with the clarity that one might hope.

Jim, July 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.26.172 (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Evan Thompson is not a psychogist, but a philosopher

As one of the trio named, it would make sense to have mention of Stuart Hampshire, who borrowed freely from Continental contemporaries without crediting them, as had Gilbert Ryle.

Notably missing are European contemporaries of Merleau-Ponty outside France.

Philosophers tend to point to Descartes, but historically there is also an important Christian heresy concerning embodiment which for centuries ran counter to Christian neo-Platonic thought and even now remains outside official theology of the mainstream of English-speaking Western religion. The doctrine that Jeshua, called The Nazarene, was simply a man has a parallel in the Japanese introduction of the Emperor as a god and the post-1945 withdrawal of this spiritual embuement as in Japan both assertion and retraction were social phenomena related to changes in power and social struction.

While not strictly in conflict with dualism, both the heresy and the retreat of supernaturalism undermine the requirement within a cultural context for a defense of dualism in a philosophical anthropology. In this regard, see Heidegger's borrowings from Japanese Buddhist thought and his wish to teach in or even to emmigrate to Japan (per Karl Jaspers.)

G. Robert Shiplett 11:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)