Assessing the landscape of representational concepts
Commentary on Favela and Machery
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21501901 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rosa Cao (0000-0002-1726-477X, Department of Philosophy Stanford University Stanford California USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 226-232 |
| Publication date | 2025-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Mind & Language (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0268-1064 • E-ISSN: 1468-0017 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/mila.12535 |
| OpenAlex | W4408319786 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 12 |
On the basis of a series of surveys targeting neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers, Favela and Machery raise concerns about the conceptual messiness around what counts as a representation . I propose some alternative explanations for the pattern of responses elicited by the surveys, arguing that the way “representation” is used in the wild may turn out to be more disciplined than it initially appears—and then offer a brief catalog of these uses, as a step towards a fuller picture of what work (if any) the concept of representation is doing in different contexts
Cognitive psychology · Cognitive science · Epistemology · Sociology · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Action Observation and Synchronization · Embodied and Extended Cognition · Philosophy · Psychology
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |