This special issue highlights the growing interdisciplinary interest in minimal cognition, bringing together a number of philosophers and scientists interested in investigating where, how, and why cognition arises. In what follows, we introduce the topic of minimal cognition by giving a brief look at debates and discussions about the lower bounds of cognition, minimally cognitive behaviors, and the possibility of life-mind continuity. Afterwards, we offer a short summary of each of the contributions to this issue. In the spirit of the Minimal Cognition conferences at the University of Wollongong at which the contributors participated, we hope this special issue will enrich the current state of minimal cognition research by putting a number of different disciplines and approaches into conversation.
BarandiaranX.MorenoA. (2006). On what makes certain dynamical systems cognitive: A minimally cognitive organization program. Adaptive Behavior, 14, 171–185.
3.
BeerR. D. (1996). Toward the evolution of dynamical neural networks for minimally cognitive behavior. In MaesP.MataricM.MeyerJ.PollackJ.WilsonS. (Eds.), From animals to animats 4: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior (pp. 421–429). MIT Press.
BeerR. D. (2003). The dynamics of active categorical perception in an evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior, 11, 209–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712303114001
6.
BeerR. D.WilliamsP. L. (2015). Information processing and dynamics in minimally cognitive agents. Cognitive Science, 39, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12142
7.
BrooksR. A. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 47, 139–159.
8.
CalvoP. (2016). The philosophy of plant neurobiology: A manifesto. Synthese, 193(5), 1323–1343.
Godfrey-SmithP. (2002a). Environmental complexity and the evolution of cognition. In SternbergR.KaufmanJ. (Eds.), The evolution of intelligence (pp. 233–249). Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Godfrey-SmithP. (2002b). Environmental complexity, signal detection, and the evolution of cognition. In BekoffM.AllenC.BurghardtG. (Eds.), The cognitive animal: Empirical and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition (pp. 135–141). MIT Press.
GoldenfeldN. (2018). Lectures on phase transitions and the renormalization group. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429493492. (Original work published 1992)
LagziI.SohS.WessonP. J.BrowneK. P.GrzybowskiB. A. (2010). Maze solving by chemotactic droplets. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 132(4), 1198–1199.
LyonP. (2017). Environmental complexity, adaptability and bacterial cognition: Godfrey-Smith’s hypothesis under the microscope. Biology & Philosophy, 32, 443–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-017-9567-1
18.
MaturanaH. R.VarelaF. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. D. Reidel Publishing.
19.
MorenoA.UmerezJ.IbañezJ. (1997). Cognition and life: the autonomy of cognition. Brain and Cognition, 34, 107–129. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1997.0909
20.
MüllerB. S.di PrimioF.LengelerJ. W. (2001). Contributions of minimal cognition to flexibility. In CallaosN.BadawyW.BozinovskiS. (Eds.), SCI 2001 proceedings of the 5th world multi-conference on systemics, cybernetics and informatics, industrial systems: Part II. Orlando: IIS, 93–98.
21.
Segundo-OrtinM.CalvoP. (2019). Are plants cognitive? A reply to Adams. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 73, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.12.001
22.
Van DuijnM.KeijzerF.FrankenD. (2006). Principles of Minimal Cognition: Casting Cognition as Sensorimotor Coordination. Adaptive Behavior, 11(2), 157–170.
23.
VarelaF.ThompsonE.RoschE. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. MIT Press.
24.
VarelaF. J. (1979). Principles of biological autonomy. Elsevier.
