INTERVIEWS
Marxism and Science from an Enactive Perspective
Kyrill Potapov and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo
Pages 109–124| Published online: 12 September 2024
Potapov, Kyrill and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo. 2024. “Marxism and Science from an Enactive Perspective.” Marxism & Sciences 3(2): 109–124.
https://doi.org/10.56063/MS.2408.03206
ABSTRACT
This interview with Ezequiel Di Paolo explores the connections between biology, politics, and cognitive science through the lens of enactivism. Di Paolo discusses the origins and influences of enactivism, including the work of Francisco Varela and its potential dialectical underpinnings. The enactive approach is contrasted with approaches foregrounding the Free Energy Principle, emphasizing the im-portance of historicity and concrete embodied experience in understanding cog-nition and life. Di Paolo critiques reductionist approaches in cognitive science, arguing for a more nuanced understanding that incorporates social and material factors. He highlights the relevance of Evald Ilyenkov’s work on the ideal and dialectics to contemporary cognitive science, suggesting that Ilyenkov’s ideas could provide a theoretical frame to bring together some threads of work already being done in this area. The interview considers political implications of differ-ent approaches to cognitive science, and how some approaches implicitly repli-cate wider contemporary social arrangements and individualistic worldviews. Di Paolo advances a dialectical approach to science that remains open to revising concepts and boundaries when confronted with concrete reality. The emphasis here is on the historical context and value judgments inherent in scientific in-quiry. He describes how a dialectical approach in science involves a constant cir-culation between abstract concepts and concrete experience, leading to a more integrated and self-critical form of knowledge production. The interview sheds light on what it might mean to work towards bringing together science and Marxism, as Ilyenkov argues for in Dialectics of the Abstract and Contrete in Marx’s Capital (1982 – Progress Publishers). Di Paolo’s own scientific inquiries are not only informed by Ilyenkov but serve as a model for how science can align with Marxist goals, ideas and methods.
KEYWORDS: Enactivism, cognitive science, dialectics, historicity, Francisco Varela, Evald Ilyenkov.
.
REFERENCES
Abrahamson, Dor, Elizabeth Dutton and Arthur Bakker. 2022. “Towards an Enactivist Mathematics Pedagogy.” In The Body, Embodiment and Education: An Interdis-ciplinary Approach. Edited by Steven A. Stolz. 156–182. London: Routledge.
Adams, Suzi. 2007. “Castoriadis and Autopoiesis.” Thesis Eleven 88 (1): 76–91.
Aguilera, Miguel, Beren Millidge, Alexander Tschantz and Christopher L. Buckley. 2022. “How Particular Is the Physics of the Free Energy Principle?” Physics of Life Re-views 40: 24–50.
Clark, Andy. 2023. The Experience Machine: How Our Minds Predict and Shape Reality. New York: Pantheon Books.
De Freitas, Elizabeth and Nathalie Sinclair. 2014. Mathematics And the Body. Material Entanglements in The Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Jaegher, Hanne and Ezequiel Di Paolo. 2007. “Participatory Sense-Making: An Enac-tive Approach to Social Cognition.” Phenomenology And the Cognitive Sciences 6: 485–507.
Di Paolo, Ezequiel A. 2005. “Autopoiesis, Adaptivity, Teleology, Agency.” Phenomenology And the Cognitive Sciences 4(4): 429–52.
Di Paolo, Ezequiel A. and Hiroyuki Iizuka. 2008. “How (Not) To Model Autonomous Behaviour.” BioSystems 91(2): 409–23.
Di Paolo, Ezequiel A., Elena Clare Cuffari and Hanne De Jaegher. 2018. Linguistic Bod-ies: The Continuity Between Life and Language. Cambridge: MIT press.
Di Paolo, Ezequiel, Evan Thompson, and Randall Beer. 2022. “Laying Down a Forking Path: Tensions Between Enaction and The Free Energy Principle.” Philosophy and the Mind Sciences 3.
Gambarotto, Andrea, and Matteo Mossio. 2024. “Enactivism and The Hegelian Stance on Intrinsic Purposiveness.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 23(1): 155–177.
Hohwy, Jakob, and Anil Seth. 2020. “Predictive Processing as A Systematic Basis for Identifying the Neural Correlates of Consciousness.” Philosophy and the Mind Sciences 1(2): 3.
Ilyenkov, Evald. 1974[1991]. “Deyatel’nost’ i Znanie [Activity and Knowledge].” In Filoso-fiya i Kul’tura [Philosophy and Culture]. Moscow: Politizdat.
———. 2008. The Dialectics of The Abstract and The Concrete in Marx’s Capital. Delhi: Aakar Books.
———. 2012. “Dialectics of the Ideal (2009).” Historical Materialism 20(2): 149–93.
Kosík, Karel. 1976. Dialectics of the Concrete: A Study on Problems of Man and World Vol. 52. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
Kropotkin, Peter. 2021. Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. Black Rose Books Ltd.
Maturana, Humberto R. and Francisco J. Varela. 1980. “Problems in The Neurophysiol-ogy of Cognition.” In Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of The Living (42): 41–47. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science.
Metzinger, Thomas. 2010. The Ego Tunnel: The Science of The Mind and The Myth of The Self Vol. 16. ReadHowYouWant.com.
Rogoff, Barbara Ed and Jean Ed Lave. 1984. Everyday Cognition: Its Development in Social Context. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. 2004. Critique Of Dialectical Reason: Theory of Practical Ensembles Vol.7. New York: Verso.
Seth, Anil. 2021. Being You: A New Science of Consciousness. UK: Penguin Books.
Varela, Francisco J. 1976. “Not One, Not Two.” Coevolution Quarterly 12: 62–67.
Varela, Francisco J., Evan Thompson and Eleanor Rosch. 2017. The Embodied Mind, Revised Edition: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge: MIT press.
Vygotsky, Lev. 2023. “The Historical Meaning of The Psychological Crisis. Methodologi-cal Research.” Psyhology & Society 1: 102–90.
Weber, Andreas, and Francisco J. Varela. 2002. “Life After Kant: Natural Purposes and The Autopoietic Foundations of Biological Individuality.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1(2): 97–125.