Rich or lean? A phenomenological alternative for explaining early social cognition

A philosophical and cognitive science paper examines data on early socio-cognitive development from a nativist cognitivist perspective and reinterprets it through the lens of the 4E-Cognition approach, specifically the pairing hypothesis derived from phenomenology. The analysis shows that these cognitivist-nativist data actually strengthen the 4E-Cognition perspective by expanding the range of findings it can explain. The authors argue that engaging seriously with opposing frameworks—cognitivism and 4E-Cognition—can lead to progress in cognitive science, particularly by addressing the debate between rich and lean explanations of early social cognition.

Study at a glance

Abstract

In philosophy and cognitive science, the tension between cognitivism and the 4E-Cognition approach is both deep and polarizing. A lack of serious engagement with the theoretical and empirical work generated by the opposing framework seems problematic on both sides. In this paper, we closely discuss data on early socio-cognitive development produced by an influential nativist current of thought in the cognitivist paradigm. We consider these data from the point of view of a 4E-Cognition perspective called “the pairing hypothesis”, which originates in phenomenological philosophy. We show that a close examination of these cognitivist-nativist data strengthens the phenomenological 4E-Cognition perspective by significantly expanding the range of findings it can account for. By addressing the debate between rich and lean explanations in early social cognition, we corroborate the idea that careful interaction between cognitivism and the 4E-Cognition approach can lead to progress in cognitive science.