Publication:
Ecological psychology is radical enough: a reply to radical enactivists

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSegundo Ortin, Miguel
dc.contributor.authorHeras Escribano, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorRaja Galián, Vicente
dc.contributor.departmentFilosofía
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-14T07:33:41Z
dc.date.available2025-01-14T07:33:41Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-26
dc.description© 2019. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. This document is the Accepted version of a Published Work that appeared in final form in Philosophical Psychology. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2019.1668238es
dc.description.abstractEcological psychology is one of the most influential theories of perception in the embodied, anti-representational, and situated cognitive sciences. However, radical enactivists claim that Gibsonians tend to describe ecological information and its ‘pick up’ in ways that make ecological psychology close to representational theories of perception and cognition. Motivated by worries about the tenability of classical views of informational content and its processing, these authors claim that ecological psychology needs to be “RECtified” so as to explicitly resist representational readings. In this paper, we argue against this call for RECtification. To do so, we offer a detailed analysis of the notion of perceptual information and other related notions such as specificity and meaning, as they are presented in the specialized ecological literature. We defend that these notions, if properly understood, remain free of any representational commitment. Ecological psychology, we conclude, does not need to be RECtified.es
dc.formatapplication/pdfes
dc.format.extent19es
dc.identifier.citationPhilosophical Psychology Volume 32, 2019 - Issue 7 p.p.1001-1023
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2019.1668238
dc.identifier.issnPrint: 0951-5089
dc.identifier.issnElectronic: 1465-394X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10201/148354
dc.languageenges
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis Groupes
dc.relationSin financiación externa a la Universidades
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09515089.2019.1668238es
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectEcological Psychologyes
dc.subjectRadical Enactivismes
dc.subjectInformationes
dc.subjectAffordanceses
dc.subjectMeaninges
dc.subjectSpecificityes
dc.titleEcological psychology is radical enough: a reply to radical enactivistses
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dspace.entity.typePublicationes
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Segundo-Ortin, Heras-Escribano & Raja_EcologicalPsychologyIsRadicalEnough_PhilosophicalPsychology.pdf
Size:
449.29 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.26 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos