Abstract
We started our discussion with several considerations about the wide range of phenomena that go under the heading of social cognition. We have looked at approaches to how mindreading works, the attribution of mental states for the purpose of explaining and predicting behaviour of others. In this regard, Chaps. 2, 3 and 4 elaborated and critically discussed the theory-theory, modularity-theory and simulation-theory as different philosophical approaches aiming to capture how such attribution works. Discussion of theories of empathy and enactive approaches brought further facets and situational differences to light. Consideration of the ambitious predictive processing framework put forward in cognitive science and philosophy completed the picture. In this concluding chapter, these discussions are briefly summarized, before some new developments and future challenges are outlined. These challenges, to do with the development of new technologies that engender new forms of social interaction, involve interactions via digital media and with humanoid robots and other AI systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bonini, L., Rotunno, C., Arcuri, E., & Gallese, V. (2022). Mirror neurons 30 years later: implications and applications. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26 (9), 767–781.
Bryson, J. J. (2010). Robots should be slaves. In Y. Wilks (Ed.), Close engagements with artificial companions: Key social, psychological, ethical and design issues (pp. 63–74). John Benjamins.
Clark, H., & Fischer, K. (2022). Social robots as depictions of social agents. Behavioral and Brain Sciences., 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22000668
Coeckelbergh, M. (2010). Health care, capabilities, and AI Assistive Technologies. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 13(2), 181–190.
Cowie, R. (2015). Ethical Issues in Affective Computing. In: The Oxford Handbook of Affective Computing (334-348). Ed. by R. Calvo, S. D’Mello, J. Gratch and A. Kappas (eds.). Oxford University Press.
Damholdt, M. F., Vestergaard, C., Nørskov, M., Hakli, R., Larsen, S., & Seibt, J. (2020). Towards a new scale for assessing attitudes towards social robots. The attitudes towards social robots scale. Interaction Studies, 21(1), 24–56.
Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Kaouri, C., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., & Werry I. (2005). What is a robot companion – Friend, assistant or butler? IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 11192–1197).
Dennett, D. C. (1987). The intentional stance. MIT Press.
Holstein K., Aleven V., & Rummel N. (2020). A conceptual framework for human–AI hybrid adaptivity in education. In I. Bittencourt, M. Cukurova, K. Muldner, R. Luckin, E. Millán (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2020). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 12163). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_20.
Lackey, J. (2021). Echo chambers, fake news, and social epistemology. In S. Bernecker, A. Floweree, T. Grundmann (Eds.), The epistemology of fake news (pp. 206–227). Oxford University Press.
Lake, B., Ullman, T., Tenenbaum, J., & Gershman, S. (2017). Building machines that learn and think like people. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 40, E253. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16001837
Levy, N. (2021). Bad Beliefs. wehy they happen to good people. Oxford University Press.
Lieberman, A., & Schroeder, J. (2020). Two social lives: How differences between online and offline interaction influence social outcomes. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 16–21.
Misselhorn, C. (2009). Empathy with inanimate objects and the uncanny valley. Journal for Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy and Cognitive Science, 19(3), 345–359.
O’Connor, C., & Weatherall, J. (2019). The misinformation age. How false beliefs spread. Yale University Press.
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin.
Seibt, J. (2018). Classifying forms and modes of co-working in the ontology of asymmetric social interactions. In M. Coeckelbergh, J. Loh, M. Funk, J. Seibt, & M. Nørskov (Eds.), Envisioning robots in society – Power, politics, and public space (pp. 133–146). IOS Press.
Sparrow, R., & Sparrow, L. (2006). In the hands of machines? The future of aged care. Minds and Machines, 16(2), 141–161.
Thi Nguyen, C. (2018). Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Episteme, 17(2), 141–161.
Vallor, S. (ed.) (2022). The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Technology. Oxford University Press.
Van Wynsberghe, A. (2016). Service robots, care ethics, and design. Ethics and Information Technology, 18(4), 311–321.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schlicht, T. (2023). Conclusion and New Challenges. In: Philosophy of Social Cognition. Palgrave Philosophy Today. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14491-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14491-2_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-14490-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-14491-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)