Decoding Validity: Embodied Cognition in Shaping Concepts about Objectivity, Subjectivity, and Institutional Dynamics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.355944Keywords:
image schemas, objectivity, subjectivity, institutions, embodiment, physicsAbstract
The notion of validity has been largely questioned in diverse research domains. While it has a long tradition in philosophy and logics, cognitive linguists are approaching new ways of understanding why it is possible to form representations in the mind that are framed in validity values, a cognitive aspect that is intertwined in the construction of concepts and reasoning. Ultimately, this impacts what humans validate and invalidate, accept as true or judge as false, and consider moral and immoral. The present article provides an approximation to a specific linguistic and cognitive process that is apparently in charge of validating and invalidating the concepts individuals create in the mind, with the aid of their socio-physical experience. Following an ethnomethodological research design, this article shows the compilation and analysis of participants’ ideas about harming or protecting the environment. The findings suggest that the embodied experience individuals create, particularly in terms of geometry, mathematics, and physics, plays a crucial role in validating and invalidating mental representations. This study sheds light on the intricate connections between socio-physical experiences and the construction of concepts, by providing valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying human cognition from language production.
Downloads
References
Aristotle (éd. 1967). Rhétorique I (Transl. M. Dufour). Les Belles Lettres.
Aristotle (éd. 1983). Éthique à Nicomaque (Transl. J. Tricot). Vrin.
Alonso, L. (2007). Sujeto y discurso: el lugar de la entrevista abierta en las prácticas de la sociología cualitativa. In J. Delgado and J. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Métodos y técnicas cualitativas de investigación en ciencias sociales (pp. 225–238). Síntesis.
Aarsand, L., & Aarsand, P. (2018). Framing and switches at the outset of qualitative research interviews. Qualitative Research, 19, 635-652. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118816623
Astington, J. & Baird, J. (2005). Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001
Barsalou, L. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 22(4), 577–660. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x99002149
Berrendonner, A. (1981). Éléments de pragmatique linguistique. Minuit.
Bocanegra, Y., García, A., Pineda, D., Buriticá, O., Villegas, A., Lopera, F., Gómez, D., Gómez-Arias, C., Cardona, J., Trujillo, N., & Ibáñez, A. (2015). Syntax, action verbs, action semantics, and object semantics in Parkinson's disease: Dissociability, progression, and executive influences. Cortex, 69, 237–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.05.022
Brems, L. (2021). Intersubjectivity and intersubjectification. In W. Xu & J. Taylor (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 161–172). Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351034708-22
Cifuentes, P. (2012). La semántica conceptual. In I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano & J. Valenzuela (2012) (Eds.), Lingüística cognitiva. Anthropos.
Corey, J., & Costa, A. (2015). The foreign language effect on moral decisions. Ciencia Cognitiva, 9(3), 57–60. https://www.cienciacognitiva.org/?p=1147
Croft, W. (2009). Toward a social cognitive linguistics. In V. Evans, & S. Pourcel (Eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (pp. 395–420). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24.25cro
Damasio, A. (2018). The strange order of things. Pantheon Books.
Damasio, A. Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (1991). Somatic markers and the guidance of behaviour: theory and preliminary testing. In H. S. Levin, H. M. Eisenberg, & A. L. Benton (Eds.), Frontal lobe function and dysfunction (pp. 217–229). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195062847.003.0011
Dehaene, S. (2014). Consciousness and the brain: Deciphering how the brain codes our thoughts. Viking Penguin.
Dennett, D. (2023). I’ve been thinking. Random House.
Deslauriers, J. (2019). Investigación cualitativa. Guía práctica. Alma Mater.
De Vega, M. (2021). Revisitando la corporeidad del lenguaje narrativo [Revisiting the embodiment of narrative language]. Revista Signos. Estudios de lingüística, 54(107), 985–1003. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342021000300985
Ellis, N. (2019). Essentials of a theory of language cognition. The Modern Language Journal, 103(Suppl. 1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12532
Evans, V. (2004). Language and time. A cognitive linguistics approach. Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (Eds.). (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. LEA & Edinburgh University Press.
Evans, V., Bergen, B., & Zinken, J. (Eds.). (2007). The cognitive linguistics reader. Equinox.
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.
Firth, A. (2010). Etnometodología (Transl. Teresa E. Cadavid). Discurso & Sociedad, 4(3), 597–614. https://doi.org/10.14198/dissoc.4.3.6
Fillmore, C. (1982). Frame semantics. Linguistics in the morning calm (Selected Papers from SICOL-1981). Hanshin Publishing Company.
Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press.
Francis, D., & Hester, S. (2004). An invitation to ethnomethodology. Sage.
Gall, M., Borg, W. & Gall, J. (1996). Educational research. An introduction (6th Ed.). Longman.
Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual spaces. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2076.001.0001
Gärdenfors, P. (2004). Conceptual spaces as a framework for knowledge representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(3), 403. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X04280098
Gärdenfors, P. (2014). The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9629.001.0001
Geeraerts D., & Cuykens, H. (Eds.). (2007). The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Gibbs, R. (2007). Why cognitive linguists should care more about empirical methods. In V. Evans, B, Bergen, & J. Zinken (Eds.), The cognitive linguistics reader (pp. 40–56). Equinox. https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.18.06gib
Giraldo, L., Restrepo, F., & Arboleda, V. (2018). Trastorno del espectro autista, electroencefalografía y neuronas espejo. Acta Neurol Colomb, 34(3), 215–222. https://doi.org/10.22379/24224022215
Givón, T. (1994). Voice and inversion. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.28
Goldman, A. (2012). A moderate approach to embodied cognitive science. Rev. Phil. Psych, 3, 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-012-0089-0
Greene, J., Sommerville, R., Nystrom, L., Darley, J., & Cohen, J. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, (293), 2105–2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872
Gosselin, L. (2005). Temporalité et modalité (postface by B. Victorri), Duculot-de Boeck. https://doi.org/10.3917/dbu.gosse.2005.01
Gosselin, L. (2010). Les modalités en français. La validation des représentations (coll. Études Chronos). Rodopi. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042027572
Gosselin, L. (2018). Quand nommer, c’est juger. In C. Schnedecker, & W. Mihatsch (Eds.), Les noms d’humains–Théorie, méthodologie, classification (pp. 44–101). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110586169-002
Hume, D. (2000 [1739–1740]). A treatise on human nature. (Edited by D. F. Norton & M. J. Norton). Oxford University Press.
Jaramillo, J. (2013). Las teorías descriptivas de la referencia de Strawson y Searle. Dos críticas a las teorías del sinsentido. Discusiones Filosóficas, 14(23), 155–177. https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/discusionesfilosoficas/article/view/740
Johnson, M. (2005). The philosophical significance of image schemas. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning. Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp. 15–31). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197532.1.15
Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (Eds.). (1996). Mental models in cognitive science. Essays in honour of Phil Johnson-Laird. Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Jusslin, S., Korpinen, K., Lilja, N., Martin, R., Lehtinen-Schnabel, J., & Anttila, E. (2022). Embodied learning and teaching approaches in language education: A mixed studies review. Educational Research Review, 37, 100480, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100480
Kamp, C. F., Sperlich, B., & Holmberg, H.-C. (2014). Exercise reduces the symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and improves social behaviour, motor skills, strength and neuropsychological parameters. Acta Paediatr, 103, 709–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.12628
Knobe, J. (2010). Person as scientist, person as moralist. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 33(4), 329–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x10000907
Laitinen, A. (2014). Against representations with two directions of fit. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 13, 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-013-9328-9
Lakoff, G. (2009). The neural theory of metaphor. University of California at Berkeley. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1437794
Lakoff, G. (2016). Language and emotion. Emotion Review, 8(3), 269–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073915595097
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.
Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive grammar, a basic introduction. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Levine, R. & Norenzayan, A. (1999). The pace of life in 31 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(2), 178–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022199030002003
Maturana, H. & Varela, F. (2004). De máquinas y seres vivos. Autopoiesis: la organización de lo vivo. Lumen.
Nathan, M. J. (2022). Foundations of embodied learning. A paradigm of education. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329098
Pulvermüller, F., Cook, C., & Hauk, O. (2012). Inflection in action: Semantic motor system activation to noun- and verb-containing phrases is modulated by the presence of overt grammatical markers. Neuroimage, 60(2), 1367–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.12.020
Redolar, D. (Ed.). (2014). Neurociencia cognitiva. Panamericana.
Restrepo-Rodas, J., Moreno, L., Fonseca, J., Vera, A., & Quiroz, D. (2021). Moral reasoning and foreign languages: A cognitive and linguistic study in bilingual teachers. In N. Loaiza, A. Botero, M. Rolong, & M. Zapata (Eds.), Research commitments for a social change (pp. 249–268). REDIPE. https://editorial.redipe.org/index.php/1/catalog/view/70/126/1506
Restrepo-Rodas, J., Niño-Buitrago, L., & Suárez, M. (2022). Naturalizing morality: From alethic to deontic and axiological values; the case of Tocar, a Colombian Spanish verb. Revista de Humanidades de Valparaiso, 20, 77–99. https://doi.org/10.22370/rhv2022iss20pp77-99
Restrepo-Rodas, J. (2024). Linguistic modalities’ interaction with theory of mind and moral cognition. Unpublished doctoral thesis at Autonomous University of Manizales, Manizales, Colombia.
Restrepo-Rodas, J., Niño-Buitrago, L., & Robledo-Castro, C. (2024). Elemental intercultural imprint: Towards a neurocognitive model of interculturality through the naturalization of philosophical concepts. Ánfora, 31(57), 269–297. https://doi.org/10.30854/anf.v31.n57.2024.1096
Restrepo-Rodas, J., Niño-Buitrago, L., Suárez, M., & Rodríguez, A. (2025). Embodied underpinnings of the direction of fit image schema (DoFIS). Forthcoming in Cognitive Linguistic Studies.
Rodríguez, A. (2015). Searle y la posibilidad de derivar un “debe” de un “es”. Escritos, 23(50), 213–229. http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/esupb/v23n50/v23n50a10.pdf
Rodríguez, A. (2018). Naturaleza biopragmática de la moral. Lenguaje y mente, condiciones necesarias de la institución moral. UAM, Editorial Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana.
Rodríguez, A. (2020). Objetividad de los juicios morales. Una revisión desde el pragmatismo lingüístico. Guillermo de Ockham, 18(1), 19–31. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1794-192X2020000100019
Rohrer, T. (2007). Embodiment and experientialism. In D. Geerarts, & H. Cuykens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp 25-47). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199738632.001.0001
Rizzolatti, G., & Rozzi, S. (2016). Motor cortex and mirror system in monkeys and humans. In G. Hickok, & S. Small (Eds.), Biology of language (pp. 59–72). Academic Press, Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407794-2.00006-7
Searle, J. R. (1964). How to derive ‘ought’ from ‘is’. Philosophical Review, 73, 43–58. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183201
Shapiro, L. (2019). Embodied cognition (2nd Ed.). Routledge, Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315180380
Sinha, C. (2007). Cognitive linguistics, psychology and cognitive science. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuykens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 1266–1294). Oxford University Press.
Spackman, J. & Yanchar, S. (2014). Embodied cognition, representationalism, and mechanism: A review and analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 44(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12028
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics (2 vols.). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6847.001.0001
Talmy, L. (2007). Attention phenomena. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuykens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 264–293). Oxford University Press.
Tay, D. (2021). Image schemas. In W. Xu and J. Taylor (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 161–172). Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351034708-12
Van Dijk, T. (2014). Discourse and knowledge, A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107775404
Wen, X. & Jiang, C. (2021). Embodiment. In X. Wen and J. Taylor (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 145–160). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351034708-11
Wolff, P. (2007). Representing causation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 136, 82–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.82
Wolff, P. (2008). Dynamics and the perception of causal events. In T. Shipley & J. Zacks (Eds.), Understanding events: How humans see, represent, and act on events (pp. 555–587). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195188370.003.0023
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
