According to direct perception theory (DPT) people understand each other’s minds by way of perceiving each other’s behavioral engagements in the world. I argue that DPT admits of two interpretations. One interpretation is found in Searle’s social ontology. The other interpretation departs from an enactivist account of social cognition. Both can make sense of what it is to perceive other minds, but in two different ways. The first claims that people can directly perceive states of mind shared in a community. In contrast, the second interpretation allows for direct perception of particular individuals’ states of mind in the context of participation in social practices. The two interpretations are argued to be compatible. People can perceive communal states of mind in another’s responsiveness to action possibilities in social environments, not only the particular other’s states of mind.
BrinckI. (2014). Developing an understanding of social norms and games: Emotional engagement, nonverbal agreement, and conversation. Theory & Psychology, 24, 737–754.
3.
ChemeroA. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15, 181–195.
4.
CostallA. (1995). Socializing affordances. Theory & Psychology, 5, 467–481.
5.
CostallA. (2012). Canonical affordances in context. Avant, 3, 85–93.
6.
DavidsenA. S.FosgerauC. F. (2015). Grasping the process of implicit mentalization. Theory & Psychology, 25, 434–454.
7.
De JaegherH. (2009). Social understanding through direct perception? Yes, by interacting. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 535–542.
8.
De JaegherH. (2013). Rigid and fluid interactions with institutions. Cognitive Systems Research, 25–26, 19–25.
9.
De JaegherH. (2015). How we affect each other. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 22, 112–132.
10.
De JaegherH.Di PaoloE. A. (2007). Participatory sense-making: An enactive approach to social cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 485–507.
11.
De JaegherH.Di PaoloE. A. (2008). Making sense in participation: An enactive approach to social cognition. In MorgantiF.CarassaA.RivaG. (Eds.), Enacting intersubjectivity: A cognitive and social perspective to the study of cognition (pp. 33–47). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: IOS Press.
12.
De JaegherH.Di PaoloE. A.GallagherS. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 441–447.
13.
Di PaoloE. A.RohdeM.De JaegherH. (2010). Horizons for the enactive mind: Values, social interaction, and play. In StewartJ.GapenneO.Di PaoloE. A. (Eds.), Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive Science (pp. 33–87). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
14.
DreyfusH. L.KellyS. D. (2007). Heterophenomenology: Heavy-handed sleight-of-hand. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 45–55.
15.
FantasiaV.De JaegherH.FasuloA. (2014). We can work it out: An enactive look at cooperation. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–11.
16.
FroeseT.Di PaoloE. A. (2009). Sociality and the life–mind continuity thesis. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 8, 439–463.
GallagherS. (2004). Situational understanding: A Gurwitschian critique of theory of mind. In EmbreeL. (Ed.), Gurwitsch’s relevance for cognitive science (pp. 25–44). Dodrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
19.
GallagherS. (2008a). Direct perception in the intersubjective context. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 535–543.
20.
GallagherS. (2008b). Inference of interaction: Social cognition without precursors. Philosophical Explorations, 11, 163–174.
21.
GallagherS. (2013). The socially extended mind. Cognitive Systems Research, 25–26, 4–12.
22.
GallagherS.BowerM. (2014). Making enactivism even more embodied. Avant, 5, 232–247.
GallagherS.MiyaharaK. (2012). Neo-pragmatism and enactive intentionality. In SchulkinJ. (Ed.), Action, perception and the brain (pp. 117–146). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
GallagherS.VargaS. (2014). Social constraints on the direct perception of emotions and intentions. Topoi, 33, 185–199.
26.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
27.
GurwitschA. (1978). Human encounters in the social world. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. (Original work published 1931)
28.
HeftH. (2013a). An ecological approach to psychology. Review of General Psychology, 17, 162–167.
29.
HeftH. (2013b). Environment, cognition, and culture: Reconsidering the cognitive map. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 14–25.
30.
KiversteinJ. (2015). Empathy and the responsiveness to social affordances. Consciousness and Cognition, 36, 532–542.
31.
KiversteinJ.MillerM. (2015). The embodied brain: Towards a radical embodied cognitive science. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–11.
32.
Lo PrestiP. (2013a). Situating norms and jointness of social interaction. The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, 9, 225–248.
33.
Lo PrestiP. (2013b). Social ontology and social cognition. Abstracta, 7, 5–17.
34.
Lo PrestiP. (2016). An ecological approach to normativity. Adaptive Behavior, 24, 3–17.
35.
MillikanR. (2014). What do thoughts do to the world? Deflating socially constituted objects. In GallottiM.MichaelJ. (Eds.), Studies in the philosophy of sociality: Vol. 1 (pp. 27–39). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
36.
PuowW. T. J. L.de JongH. L. (2015). Rethinking situated and embodied social psychology. Theory & Psychology, 25, 411–433.
37.
RietveldE. (2008a). Situated normativity: The normative aspect of embodied cognition in unreflective action. Mind, 117, 973–1001.
38.
RietveldE. (2008b). The skillful body as a concernful system of possible actions. Theory & Psychology, 18, 341–363.
39.
RietveldE.KiversteinJ. (2014). A rich landscape of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 26, 325–352.
40.
SearleJ. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York, NY: The Free Press.
41.
SearleJ. (2006). Social ontology: Some basic principles. Anthropological Theory, 6, 12–29.
42.
SearleJ. (2010). Making the social world: The structure of human civilization. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
SearleJ. (2015). Status functions and institutional facts: Reply to Hindriks and Guala. Journal of Institutional Economics, 11, 507–514.
44.
ShotterJ. (2014). Agential realism, social constructionism, and our living relations to our surroundings: Sensing similarities rather than patterns. Theory & Psychology, 24, 305–325.
45.
TanakaS. (2015). Intercorporeality as a theory of social cognition. Theory & Psychology, 25, 455–472.
46.
ThompsonE. (2007). Mind in life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47.
TomaselloM.CarpenterM.CallJ.BehneT.MollH. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 675–735.
48.
TuomelaR. (2003). Collective acceptance, social institutions, and social reality. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 62, 123–163.
VarelaF. J. (1987). Laying down a path in walking. In ThompsonW. I. (Ed.), Gaia: A way of knowing. Political implications of the new biology (pp. 48–64). Hudson, NY: Lindisfarne.
51.
VarelaF. J.ThompsonE.RoschE. (1991). The embodied mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
52.
WithagenR.van WermeskerkenM. (2010). The role of affordances in evolutionary process reconsidered. Theory & Psychology, 20, 489–510.
