PL EN


2015 | Tom: 5 | Numer: 1 | 135-150
Article title

Płeć kulturowa w rozproszonych systemach poznawczych – możliwości konceptualizacji

Content
Title variants
EN
Gender in distributed cognitive systems: Possible conceptualizations
Languages of publication
PL
Abstracts
PL
There is a mismatch between social and biological approaches in the studies on sex and gender. Neurofeminist researchers critically examine gendered impacts of research in neuroscience and cognitive science, as well as develop more adequate and gender‑appropriate neuroscientific studies. However, they still seem to be focused on the brain and its relationship with the environment. Moreover, there are a little ‘science‑phobic’ feminist approaches based on actor‑network theory, and social science and technology studies. In this context, I would like to suggest another account of gender. My account is not centered on individual selves, minds or brains, but it is based on concept of distributed cognitive system and cultural ecosystem developed in the cognitive science. The potential integrational role of the approach seems worthy of attention. On the one hand, there are no contradictions between more important assumptions of distributed cognition theory and social studies. On the other hand, it is not necessarily limited to human beings and their minds. I pay particular attention to distinction between the distributed cognition theory and the extended mind theory. Ones of the most important elements of the ‘gender‑sensitive’ distributed system are artifacts and their affordances, most of all — cultural and canonical ones. In this light, the gender relations seem not only distributed, but also able to be designed.
Year
Volume
Issue
Pages
135-150
Physical description
Dates
published
2015
Contributors
  • Uniwersytet Warszawski, Instytut Filozofii
References
  • Bluhm, R., Jacobson, A. J., & Maibom, H. L. (Red.). (2012). Neurofeminism: Issues at the intersection of feminist theory and cognitive science. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Brahnam, S. & Angeli, A. De. (2012). Gender affordances of conversational agents. Interacting with Computers, 24(3), 139–153.
  • Clark, A. & Chalmers, D. (2008). Umysł rozszerzony. W: M. Miłkowski & R. Poczobut (Red.). Analityczna metafizyka umysłu. Najnowsze kontrowersje (s. 342–357). (M. Miłkowski, Przeł.). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN.
  • Cockburn, C. (1985). Machinery of dominance: Women, men and technical know‑how.London: Pluto Press.
  • Corrigan, L. T. & Mills, A. J. (2012). Men on board: Actor‑network theory, feminism and gendering the past. Management & Organizational History, 7(3), 251–265.
  • Costall, A. (2012). Afordancje kanoniczne w kontekście. (K. Bielecka, Przeł.). Avant, 3(2), 296–304.
  • Costall, A. & Richards, A. (2013). Canonical affordances: The psychology of everyday things. W: P. Graves‑Brown, R. Harrison, & A. Piccini (Red.). The Oxford handbook of the archaeology of the contemporary world (s. 82–93). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Fine, C., Jordan‑Young, R., Kaiser, A., & Rippon, G. (2013). Plasticity, plasticity, plasticity…and the rigid problem of sex. Trends in Cognitive Science, 17(11), 550–551.
  • Foucault, M. (1998). Nadzorować i karać. (T. Komendant, Przeł.). Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Giere, R. N. & Moffatt, B. (2003). Distributed cognition: Where the cognitive and the social merge. Social Studies of Science, 33(2), 1–10.
  • Hackett, E. J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M. E., & Wajcman, J. (Red.). (2007). The handbook of science and technology studies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Haraway, D. (1997). Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse: Feminism and technoscience. London: Routledge.
  • Hartson, H. R. (2003). Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design. Behaviour & Information Technology, 22(5), 315–338.
  • Heintz, C. (2004). Introduction: Why there should be a cognitive anthropology of science. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4(3–4), 391–408.
  • Hungerford, E. (2015). Brain sex does not exist. Dostęp: http://sexnotgender.com/brain‑sex‑does‑not‑exist/ (04.05.2015).
  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Hutchins, E. (2001). Distributed cognition. W: N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Red.). The international encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (s. 2068–2072). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd.
  • Hutchins, E. (2013). The cultural ecosystem of human cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 27(1), 34–49.
  • Kirsh, D. (2006). Distributed cognition: A methodological note. Pragmatics and Cognition, 14(2), 249–262.
  • Kirsh, D. (2014). Myślenie za pomocą reprezentacji zewnętrznych. (Ł. Afeltowicz, Przeł.). Avant, 5(1), 94–125.
  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor‑network theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Nersessian, N. J., Kurz‑Milcke, E., Newstetter, W. C., & Davies, J. (2003). Research laboratories as evolving distributed cognitive systems. W: R. Alterman & D. Kirsh (Red.). Proceedings of the twenty‑fifth annual conference of the cognitive science society. Dostęp: http://clic.gatech.edu/papers/NersessianKurzMilckeNewstetterDavies2003.pdf (10.05.2015).
  • Neurofeminism (2013). Dostęp: http://www.newappsblog.com/neurofeminism (04.05.2015).
  • Norman, D. (1999). Affordance, conventions and design. Interactions, 6(3), 38–43.
  • Piper, A. M. & Hollan, J. D. (2009). Tabletop displays for small group study: Affordances of paper and digital materials. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Dostęp: http://hci.ucsd.edu/hollan/Pubs/piperCHI2009.pdf (10.05.2015).
  • Rietveld, E., Haan, S. de, & Denys, D. (2013). Social affordances in context: What is it that we are bodily responsive to?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(4), 436–436.
  • Robbins, P. & Aydede, M. (Red.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Schmitz, S. & Höppner, G. (2014). Gendered neurocultures: Feminist and queer perspectives on current brain discourses (= Challenge Gender, 2). Vienna: Zaglossus.
  • Solymosi, S. (2013). Against representation: A brief introduction to cultural affordances. Human Affairs, 23(4), 594–605.
  • Tan, T.‑H., Lin, M.‑S.,Chu, Y.‑L.,& Liu, T.‑Y. (2012). Educational affordances of a ubiquitous learning environment in a natural science course. Educational Technology & Society,15(2), 206–219.
  • Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Wajcman, J. (2007). From women and technology to gendered technoscience. Information, Communication & Society, 10(3), 287–298.
  • Wajcman, J. (2009). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 143–152.
  • Zhang, J. & Patel, V. (2006). Distributed cognition, representation, and affordance. Cognition & Pragmatics, 14(2), 333–341.
  • Zuo, Z. (2010). Research on how the facial expression effect the sex information processing from affordance perspective. Master’s Dissertation, Hebei University. Dostęp: http://www.dissertationtopic.net/doc/703332 (10.05.2015).
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-d850ad1c-67fc-412d-b372-a327b7aa4ff8
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.