Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities

We argue that our capacity to use imagination to acquire knowledge of objective possibilities should be explained in terms of the embodied nature of our imagination. Our imagination is able to be sufficiently reality oriented due to constraints that are a natural consequence of embodied simulation. That is, our bodies, shaped by their histories of interactions with the environment, can play a role in constraining the imagination so that it, sometimes, is epistemically useful. However, insofar as these constraints support our capacity to acquire knowledge of non-actual possibilities, this support is only likely to accrue for knowledge of relatively mundane and parochial possibilities, yet potentially detrimentally distorting when dealing with possibilities that are alien to our specific embodied ways of being. The cases where embodied constraints are likely to fail to provide epistemic support to the imagination include many of the kinds of thought experiment that are central to philosophers’ attempts to gain knowledge of possibilities. Thus, at least insofar as imagination is taken to play a central epistemic role in these cases, one should exercise a degree of modesty.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophical Psychology
Published
2024-10-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2417990
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Action Observation and Synchronization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.93
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities

Tom Schoonen, Max Jones
3 citations
Philosophical Psychology
Action Observation and Synchronization
1.93
article

Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities

Tom Schoonen, Max Jones
article en
3 citations

Abstract

We argue that our capacity to use imagination to acquire knowledge of objective possibilities should be explained in terms of the embodied nature of our imagination. Our imagination is able to be sufficiently reality oriented due to constraints that are a natural consequence of embodied simulation. That is, our bodies, shaped by their histories of interactions with the environment, can play a role in constraining the imagination so that it, sometimes, is epistemically useful. However, insofar as these constraints support our capacity to acquire knowledge of non-actual possibilities, this support is only likely to accrue for knowledge of relatively mundane and parochial possibilities, yet potentially detrimentally distorting when dealing with possibilities that are alien to our specific embodied ways of being. The cases where embodied constraints are likely to fail to provide epistemic support to the imagination include many of the kinds of thought experiment that are central to philosophers’ attempts to gain knowledge of possibilities. Thus, at least insofar as imagination is taken to play a central epistemic role in these cases, one should exercise a degree of modesty.

Philosophical PsychologyVol. 39(2)
University of Bristol (GB), University of Amsterdam (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Action Observation and Synchronization
1.93
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities — Tom Schoonen, Max Jones · Philosophical Psychology (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS