Abstract
According to Edwin Hutchins (in Cogn Sci 19:265–288, 1995a; Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press, 1995b), cognitive science should explain how humans became skilled processors of symbolic structures, rather than assuming that the architecture of cognition is symbolic. He suggests that the origin of symbolic processing should be traced back to human interaction in sociocultural systems. Developing Hutchins’ ideas, the distributed approach to language grounds linguistic abilities in proto-symbolic exchanges that can be observed in early child–parent interactions (Spurrett and Cowley in The Extended Mind. The MIT Press, 2010). Here, the parent’s adoption of a language stance (i.e., the assumption that children’s gestures and utterances have a symbolic content) leads to the reinforcement of the child's linguistic behavior, which in turn leads the child to adopt a linguistic stance toward other people, and so on. In this view, the parent–child pair forms a dual system from which the language stance emerges. In order to envisage an explanation to human’s symbolic processing abilities in a distributed perspective, we propose to add a further step to this hypothesis. Once language is adopted as the privileged vehicle for interaction, a symbolic stance, in which symbols are understood as if they were well-codified objects of a specific language, emerges on a multiple system composed of (at least) a cognitive subject, the social community of users of certain symbolic systems, and the conventions and norms associated with the use of these symbolic 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
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
According to Clark’s hypothesis of organism-centered cognition, the core of cognition is (obviously) the brain (Clark 2008, p. 39).
- 3.
- 4.
A hypothesis on the origin of language from lower-level cultural practices has recently been proposed in Cowley and Kuhle (2020). Here, the continuity between animal and human cognition is made visible through a comparison between socially/culturally learned practices in higher primates (in particular, the use of instruments to gain food) and languaging in non-literate societies.
- 5.
See also Love (2004).
- 6.
The main issues in this topic are discussed in Dehaene and Brannon (2011).
- 7.
For an overview and an interesting solution of this debate, see Pantsar (2014).
References
Bender, A., & Beller, S. (2012). Nature and culture of finger counting: Diversity and representational effects of an embodied cognitive tool. Cognition, 124(2), 156–182.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1967). Recent contributions to the theory of innate ideas. Synthese, 17, 2–11.
Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind. Embodiment, action and cognitive extension, Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain. The MIT Press.
Cowley, S. J. (2011). Taking a language stance. Ecological Psychology, 23, 185–209.
Cowley, S. J., & Kuhle, A. (2020). The rise of languaging. Bio Systems, 198, 104264.
Cowley, S. J., Moodley, S., & Fiori-Cowley, A. (2004). Grounding signs of culture: Primary intersubjectivity in social semiosis. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11, 109–132.
de Saussure, F. (1922). Cours de linguistique générale. Payot.
Dehaene S., & Brannon E. (Eds.). (2011). Space, time and number in the brain: Searching for the foundations of mathematical thought. Academic Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Little Brown and Company.
Dennett, D. C. (1989). The intentional stance. MIT Press.
Domahs, F., Moeller, K., Huber, S., Willmes, K., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2010). Embodied numerosity: Implicit hand-based representations influence symbolic number processing across cultures. Cognition, 116, 251–266.
Gelman, R., & Gallistel, C. (1978). The child’s understanding of number. Harvard University Press.
Giunti, M., & Pinna, S. (2016). For a dynamical approach to human computation. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 24(4), 557–569.
Harris, R. (2000). Rethinking writing. Athlone Press.
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
Hutchins, E. (1995a). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19, 265–288.
Hutchins, E. (1995b). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press.
Hutchins, E. (2014). The cultural ecosystem of human cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 27(1), 34–49.
Love, N. (2004). Cognition and the language myth. Language Sciences, 26, 525–544.
Newell, A. (1980). Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 4, 135–183.
Pantsar, M. (2014). An empirically feasible approach to the epistemology of arithmetic. Synthese, 191(17), 4201–4229.
Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial (2nd ed.). The MIT Press.
Spurrett, D., & Cowley, S. J. (2010). The extended infant: Utterance-activity and distributed cognition. In R. Menary (Ed.), The extended mind (pp. 295–323). The MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pinna, S., Garavaglia, F.G., Giunti, M. (2024). Symbolic Processing as the Result of Social Interactions. In: Minati, G., Pietronilla Penna, M. (eds) Multiple Systems. AIRSNC 2023. Contributions to Management Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44685-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44685-6_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-44684-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-44685-6
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)