What does it mean to enact a jazz beat as a creative performer? This article offers a critical reading of Iyer’s much-cited theory on rhythmic enaction. We locate the sonic environment approach in Iyer’s theory, and criticize him for advancing a one-to-one relationship between everyday perception and full-fledged aural competence of jazz musicians, and for comparing the latter with non-symbolic behaviour of non-human organisms. As an alternative, we suggest a Merleau-Ponty-inspired concept of rhythmic enaction, which we call the enactive communicative approach. Key to this approach is the fact that jazz musicians play by ear, and that the beat emerges because of reciprocal, real-time aural communication. From this perspective, we outline the temporality of a jazz beat as a holistic and dialectical temporal structure. Throughout the discussions, we use John Coltrane’s ‘Trane’s Slo Blues’ as a point of reference.
This article discusses Hans Jonas’ argument for teleology in living organisms, in light of recently raised concerns over enactivism’s “Jonasian turn.” Drawing on textual resources rarely discussed in contemporary enactivist literature on Jonas’ philosophy, we reconstruct five core ideas of his thinking: 1) That natural science’s rejection of teleology is methodological rather than ontological, and thus not a proof of its non-existence; 2) that denial of the reality of teleology amounts to a performative self-contradiction; 3) that the fact of evolution makes it implausible that only humans actualize purpose; 4) that the concept of metabolism delimits and gestures towards beings performing purposive activity; and 5) that concrete encounters with living organisms are indispensable for the judgment that they are purposive. Lastly, we draw attention to how Jonas’ understanding of teleology and inwardness in nonhuman life in terms of degrees of identity with human life poses a problem for his view. In this way, we hope to clarify what Jonas, as an important source of inspiration for the enactivist project, is proposing.
In this article I take on the "Transcendentalist Challenge" to naturalized phenomenology, highlighting how the ontological and methodological commitments of Merleau-Ponty's philosophy point in the direction of an integration of the transcendental and the scientific, thus making room for a productive exchange between philosophy and psychological science when it comes to understanding consciousness and its place in nature. Discussing various conceptions of naturalized phenomenology, I argue that what I call an "Integrationist View" is required if we are to make sense of the possibility of productive exchange between phenomenology and the sciences. My main argument is that if we conceive of consciousness as a structure of behavior ontologically prior to the distinctions between objectivity and subjectivity and third-and first-person perspectives, we arrive at a view of the transcendental as not essentially separate from the domain of science, but rather as contingent organizational norms of empirical nature that are best illuminated through a dialectical exchange between phenomenological and scientific approaches. I end by showing how Merleau-Ponty's engagement with the "Schneider case" in an example of such an integration.
With Jan Degenaar and Kevin O’Regan’s (D&O) critique of (what they call) ‘autopoietic enactivism’ as point of departure, this article seeks to revisit, refine, and develop phenomenology’s significance for the enactive view. Arguing that D&O’s ‘sensorimotor theory’ fails to do justice to perceptual meaning, the article unfolds by (1) connecting this meaning to the notion of enaction as a meaningful co-definition of perceiver and perceived, (2) recounting phenomenological reasons for conceiving of the perceiving subject as a living body, and (3) showing how the phenomenological perspective does a better job at fulfilling D&O’s requirement for grounding notions of mentality in ‘outer’ criteria than they do. The picture that thus emerges is one of perceptual meaning as an integration of lived, living, and behavioral aspects – a structure of behavior that cannot be captured by appeal to sensorimotor capacities alone but that is adequately illuminated by the enactive notion of adaptive autonomy.
stipendiat, Institutt for Filosofi og Religionsvitenskap, NTNU Netland startet som doktorgradsstipendiat ved Institutt for filosofi og religionsvitenskap, NTNU høsten 2018, med et prosjekt om fenomenologiens metodologiske rolle i nyere «enactivist»-tilnaerminger til kognisjonsvitenskap. I tillegg til fenomenologi og kognisjonsvitenskap, inkluderer hans interesseområder blant annet hverdagsspråkfilosofi, epistemologi og sinnsfilosofi. thomas.netland@ntnu.no SAMMENDRAG I Retrieving Realism (2015), søker Dreyfus og Taylor (D&T) å 1) forkaste det de kaller «medieringsbildet» til fordel for en «kontaktteori» om forholdet mellom sinn og verden, 2) forsvare et skille mellom «hverdagsvirkeligheten» og ting slik de er i seg selv og 3) gjøre dette uten å komme med dristige filosofiske teser. Problemet er at 2) står i fare for å undergrave muligheten for både 1) og 3). Denne artikkelen gjennomgår og problematiserer sentrale elementer i D&Ts argumentasjon, før den med utgangspunkt i en fenomenologisk persepsjonsanalyse skisserer en mer tilfredsstillende vei mot en uproblematisk realismeposisjon. NøkkelordDreyfus, fenomenologi, Merleau-Ponty, realisme, Taylor, ting i seg selv ABSTRACTIn Retrieving Realism (2015) Dreyfus and Taylor (D&T) aim to 1) reject what they call «the mediational picture» in favor of a «contact theory» regarding the mind-world relation, 2) defend a distinction between «everyday reality» and things as they are in themselves, and 3) do this without positing daring philosophical theses. The problem is that 2) seems to undermine the possibility of both 1) and 3). This article reviews some of the central elements in D&T's arguments, before sketching a more satisfactory approach toward an unproblematic realism by way of a phenomenological analysis of perception.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.