Uma revisão enativista do argumento não-conceitualista da riqueza experiencial e seu modelo de conteúdo perceptual

Autores

  • Vinícius Francisco Apolinário Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo (UFES)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21680/1983-2109.2026v33n70ID39202

Palavras-chave:

Enativismo, Percepção, Não-conceitualismo, Enativismo radical, Cognitivismo, Conteúdo-mental

Resumo

Neste artigo, buscaremos analisar criticamente o argumento não-conceitualista da riqueza da percepção a partir da tradição enativista sensório-motora. De acordo com os não-conceitualistas, o conteúdo da percepção é muito mais rico e detalhado do que o conteúdo das nossas crenças. O modelo de conteúdo perceptual não-conceitualista assume que possuímos uma representação interna e detalhada do ambiente. A abordagem enativista rejeita a ideia de que construímos representações internas do ambiente para percebermos. O fato de que possuímos acesso imediato ao ambiente por meio das habilidades sensório-motoras torna dispensável a reconstrução do ambiente na forma de representações mentais. Se esse é o caso, o argumento da riqueza da percepção não é adequado para defender uma abordagem não-conceitualista. Nossa sugestão é que o enativismo explica melhor o caráter não-conceitual da percepção sem postular a necessidade de representações internas e detalhadas do ambiente.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

BARRETT, Louise. Beyond the Brain: How Body and Environment Shape Animal and Human Minds. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011.

BERMÚDEZ, José. Philosophy of psychology: a contemporary introduction. New York: Routledge, 1998.

BERMÚDEZ, José. Nonconceptual content: from perceptual experience to subpersonal computational states. In: GUNTHER, York. (ed.). Essays on nonconceptual content. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, 2003.

BERMÚDEZ, José. The distinction between conceptual and nonconceptual content. In: MCLAUGHLIN, Brian.; BECKERMANN, Ansgar.; WALTER, Sven. (ed.). The oxford handbook of philosophy of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

BREWER, Bill. Perception and reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

BURGE, Tyler. Marr’s theory of vision. In: GARFIELD, Jay. Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1989. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4735.003.0028.

BURGE, Tyler. Perceptual Entitlement. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, v. 67, n. 3, 2003, p. 503–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2003.tb00307.x

BURGE, Tyler. Origins of perception. Disputatio, v. 4, n. 1, 2010, p. 1–38. https://doi.org/10.2478/disp-2010-0009.

CARVALHO, Eros. An actionist approach to the justificational role of perceptual

experience. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, v. 72, n. 2-3, 2016, p. 545-572. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44028685.

CLARK, Andy. Where Brain, Body, and World Collide. Daedalus, v. 127, n. 2, 1998, p. 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0417(99)00002-9.

FUCHS, Thomas. The Brain: A Mediating Organ. Journal of Consciousness Studies, v. 18, n. 7–8, 2001, p. 196–221. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2011/00000018/f0020007/art00009.

JOHNSON, Mark.; TUCKER, Don. Out of the Cave: A Natural Philosophy of Mind and Knowing. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2021.

HECK, Richard. Nonconceptual content and the space of reasons. The Philosophical Review, v. 109, 2000, p. 483-523. https://doi.org/10.2307/2693622.

HURLEY, Susan. Consciousness in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

KELLY, Sean. Demonstrative concepts and experience. Philosophical Review, v. 110, n. 3, 2001, p. 397–420. https://doi.org/10.2307/2693650.

MCDOWELL, John. Mind and World. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1996.

NÖE, Alva.; O’REGAN, John. A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, v. 24, n. 5, 2001, p. 939–1031. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x01000115.

NÖE, Alva.; O’REGAN, John. On the brain-basis of visual consciousness: a sensorimotor account. In: NÖE, Alva.; O’REGAN, John. Vision and mind: selected readings in the philosophy of perception. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2002.

NOË, Alva. Action in perception. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2004.

NOË, Alva. Out of our heads: why you are not your brain, and other lessons from the biology of consciousness. New York: Hill and Wang, 2009.

NOË, Alva. Conscious reference. In: HAWLEY, Katherine.; MACPHERSON, Fiona. The admissible contents of experience. Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

NOË, Alva. Varieties of presence. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2012.

O’REGAN, John. Solving the “real” mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. Canadian journal of psychology, v. 46, n. 3, 1992, p. 461–488. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0084327.

PEACOCKE, Christopher. Sense and content: experience, thought, and their relations. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1983.

PEACOCKE, Christopher. A study of concepts. 2. ed. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1999.

PEACOCKE, Christopher. Does perception have a nonconceptual content? The Journal of Philosophy, v. 98, n. 5, 2001, p. 239–264. https://doi.org/10.2307/2678383.

PICCININI, Gualtiero. The Computational Theory of Cognition. In: MÜLLER, Vincent. (ed.). Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence. Switzerland: Synthese Library, 2016.

RAFTOPOULOS, Athanassios.; MÜLLER, Vincent. The phenomenal content of experience. Mind and Language, v. 21, n. 2, 2006, p. 187–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0268-1064.2006.00311.x.

RAFTOPOULOS, Athanassios. The cognitive impenetrability of the content of early vision is a necessary and sufficient condition for purely nonconceptual content. Philosophical Psychology, v. 27, n. 5, 2014, p. 601-620. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2012.729486.

ROSKIES, Adina. A new argument for nonconceptual content. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, v. 76, n. 3, 2008, p. 633–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2008.00160.x.

SCHMIDT, Eva. Modest Nonconceptualism: epistemology, phenomenology, and content. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2015.

STERELNY, Kim. The representational theory of mind: an introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd, 1990.

TORIBIO, Josefa. Nonconceptual content. Philosophy Compass, v. 2, n. 3, 2007, p. 445–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2007.00075.x.

TYE, Michael. Nonconceptual Content, Richness, and Fineness of Grain. In: GENDLER, Tamar.; HAWTHORNE, John. Perceptual Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Downloads

Publicado

09-12-2025

Como Citar

APOLINÁRIO, Vinícius Francisco. Uma revisão enativista do argumento não-conceitualista da riqueza experiencial e seu modelo de conteúdo perceptual. Princípios: Revista de Filosofia (UFRN), [S. l.], v. 32, n. 69, 2025. DOI: 10.21680/1983-2109.2026v33n70ID39202. Disponível em: https://www.periodicos.ufrn.br/principios/article/view/39202. Acesso em: 19 dez. 2025.