A literatura filosófica sobre a Psicologia do Senso Comum se estende desde a década de 1970, e abrange diversas questões sobre nosso entendimento interpessoal cotidiano, nossa capacidade de interação e coordenação de atividades, o arcabouço conceitual intuitivo que relaciona estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais a comportamentos, e os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental que nos permitem atribuir estados mentais a outras pessoas. Nesta dissertação eu examino o desenvolvimento histórico desta literatura, identificando dois debates distintos, o primeiro (principalmente entre Paul Churchland e Jerry Fodor dos anos 70 aos anos 90) tendo como foco a relação entre a teoria da Psicologia do Senso Comum e teorias científicas (da neurociência e das ciências cognitivas), e o segundo (o debate contemporâneo) tendo como foco os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental e o papel das atribuições de estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais nas teorias da cognição corporificada, situada e estendida. Além do exame histórico do que argumento serem dois debates distintos e da transição conceitual entre ambos, também apresento aqui minha crítica à abordagem eliminativista contemporânea de Matthew Ratcliffe e, como alternativa, articulo os princípios de uma abordagem pluralista que combina leitura mental e interpretação contextual situada como fundamentais para a cognição social / The philosophical literature on Folk Psychology began in the 1970s, and encompasses various questions about our everyday interpersonal understanding, our ability to interact and coordinate activities, the intuitive conceptual framework that relates mental states and propositional attitudes to behaviors, and the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading that allow us to attribute mental states to other people. In this thesis I examine the historical development of this literature, identifying two distinct debates, the first (mainly between Paul Churchland and Jerry Fodor from the 70s to the 90s) focusing on the relationship between the theory of Folk Psychology and scientific theories (in neuroscience and cognitive science), and the second (the contemporary debate) focusing on the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading and the role played by attributions of mental states and propositional attitudes in theories of embodied, situated and extended cognition. In addition to the historical examination of what I argue are two distinct debates as well as of the conceptual transition between them, here I present my criticism of Matthew Ratcliffe\'s contemporary eliminativist approach and, as an alternative to it, I articulate the principles of a pluralistic approach that combines both mindreading and situated contextual interpretation as fundamental for social cognition

No description available.

A literatura filosófica sobre a Psicologia do Senso Comum se estende desde a década de 1970, e abrange diversas questões sobre nosso entendimento interpessoal cotidiano, nossa capacidade de interação e coordenação de atividades, o arcabouço conceitual intuitivo que relaciona estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais a comportamentos, e os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental que nos permitem atribuir estados mentais a outras pessoas. Nesta dissertação eu examino o desenvolvimento histórico desta literatura, identificando dois debates distintos, o primeiro (principalmente entre Paul Churchland e Jerry Fodor dos anos 70 aos anos 90) tendo como foco a relação entre a teoria da Psicologia do Senso Comum e teorias científicas (da neurociência e das ciências cognitivas), e o segundo (o debate contemporâneo) tendo como foco os mecanismos cognitivos de leitura mental e o papel das atribuições de estados mentais e atitudes proposicionais nas teorias da cognição corporificada, situada e estendida. Além do exame histórico do que argumento serem dois debates distintos e da transição conceitual entre ambos, também apresento aqui minha crítica à abordagem eliminativista contemporânea de Matthew Ratcliffe e, como alternativa, articulo os princípios de uma abordagem pluralista que combina leitura mental e interpretação contextual situada como fundamentais para a cognição social / The philosophical literature on Folk Psychology began in the 1970s, and encompasses various questions about our everyday interpersonal understanding, our ability to interact and coordinate activities, the intuitive conceptual framework that relates mental states and propositional attitudes to behaviors, and the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading that allow us to attribute mental states to other people. In this thesis I examine the historical development of this literature, identifying two distinct debates, the first (mainly between Paul Churchland and Jerry Fodor from the 70s to the 90s) focusing on the relationship between the theory of Folk Psychology and scientific theories (in neuroscience and cognitive science), and the second (the contemporary debate) focusing on the cognitive mechanisms of mindreading and the role played by attributions of mental states and propositional attitudes in theories of embodied, situated and extended cognition. In addition to the historical examination of what I argue are two distinct debates as well as of the conceptual transition between them, here I present my criticism of Matthew Ratcliffe\'s contemporary eliminativist approach and, as an alternative to it, I articulate the principles of a pluralistic approach that combines both mindreading and situated contextual interpretation as fundamental for social cognition

Dans cette thèse je défends l'élimination des concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles. Dans le premier chapitre, je présente les thèses éliminativistes en philosophie de l'esprit et des sciences cognitives contemporaines. Il y a deux types d'éliminativisme: le matérialisme éliminatif et l'éliminativisme des concepts. Il est possible d'éliminer les concepts soit des théories naïves soit des théories scientifiques. L'éliminativisme à propos des concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles que je défends requière le second type d'élimination. Dans les trois chapitres suivants je donne trois arguments en faveur de cette thèse. Je commence par soutenir que la théorie interventionniste de la causalité ne fonde pas nos jugements de causalité mentale. Ensuite je montre que nos concepts d'attitudes propositionnelles ne sont pas des concepts d'espèces naturelles car ils groupent ensemble les états des différents modules d'une architecture massivement modulaire, la thèse de modularité massive faisant partie, je l'affirme, de notre meilleur programme de recherche. Finalement, mon troisième argument repose sur l’élimination du concept de contenu mental de nos théories. Dans les deux derniers chapitres de la thèse, je défends ce dernier argument. Tout d'abord, je réfute l'argument du succès selon lequel étant donné que les psychologues emploient le concept de contenu mental et ce faisant produisent de la bonne science ce concept ne devrait pas être éliminé. Ensuite je rejette une autre façon d'éliminer ce concept, celle choisie par les théoriciens de la cognition étendue. Pour cela je réfute le meilleur argument qui a été donné en faveur de cette thèse: l'argument du système. / In this dissertation, I argue for the elimination of propositional attitudes concepts. In the first chapter I sketch the landscape of eliminativism in contemporary philosophy of mind and cognitive science. There are two kinds of eliminativism: eliminative materialism and concept eliminativism. One can further distinguish between folk and science eliminativism about concepts: whereas the former says that the concept should be eliminated from our folk theories, the latter says that the concept should be eliminated form our scientific theories. The eliminativism about propositional attitudes concepts I defend is a species of the latter. In the next three chapters I put forward three arguments for this thesis. I first argue that the interventionist theory of causation cannot lend credit to our claims of mental causation. I then support the thesis by showing that propositional attitudes concepts aren't natural kind concepts because they cross-cut the states of the modules posited by the thesis of massive modularity, a thesis which, I contend, is part of our best research-program. Finally, my third argument rests on science eliminativism about the concept of mental content. In the two last chapters of the dissertation I first defend the elimination of the concept of mental content from the success argument, according to which as psychologists produce successful science while using the concept of mental content, the concept should be conserved. Then, I dismiss an alternative way of eliminating the concept, that is, the way taken by proponents of extended cognition, by refuting what I take to be the best argument for extended cognition, namely, the system argument.

(in English): This thesis focuses on the theories of Human-computer interaction, called by the selected authors "postcognitivistic", that react critically to the cognitivistic approach of the first- wave HCI. The working hypothesis of this work is to view the broader context of interface of technological objects as a medium of a sociotechnical relation between technological artefacts, human actors and the society. The goal of the thesis is to develop a theoretic-philosophical analysis and the comparison of how the primary sources focused on the HCI theory and sociotechnical systems, together with the chosen literature on the new media theory and philosophy of technology, contribute to the contemporary discussion about the contextual aspects of HCI, including the question of how seeing the interface as a sociotechnical relation influences the work of the designers who have to deal with the complexity of contemporary design problems.

This investigation can be described as a long journey to a final destination: a truth in religion. We start by considering dualism of the subjective and the objective, the classical model of cognition that underlies notions of truth. Dualistic notions of cognition lead to serious problems, especially for religious truth. Religions claim to state truths about the nature of the universe and human destiny, but these truths are incompatible. With a dualistic model this problem of diversity of religious truths leads to fundamentalism or relativism. Thus, this research aims to turn to the roots of the cognitive situation and investigate the way we cognize and relate to the world to provide a better model. As we consider the philosophical theories and empirical investigations of cognition, we come to the conclusion that dualism of the subjective and objective is not tenable. As the findings of contemporary mind sciences and phenomenologically oriented research indicate, human cognition is embodied, embedded, enacted, extended, and shaped by language. Thus, I propose to re-conceptualize the cognitive situation to provide a better philosophical account. I put forward a tripartite model of cognition, which unites language, action, and environment. The consequent application of this model to the issues of truth and religion shows that we can avoid the problem of diversity of truth claims. A tripartite model allows us to explain how we can maintain religion as true, despite the diversity of religious truth claims. Additionally, as this model is fundamental, its application leads to various new findings and inferences, which render anew the world and the way humans relate to it. Thus, our journey brings us to new frontiers of investigation.