Situated Cognition

1. Introduction

Situated cognition is a family of approaches in philosophy and cognitive science that challenge the idea that thinking is an abstract, self-contained process occurring solely inside the brain. Instead, these approaches maintain that cognitive processes are deeply dependent on, and sometimes partly realized in, an agent’s bodily constitution, material surroundings, and social practices.

The entry’s focus is on how this broad orientation reshapes philosophical questions about mind and knowledge, and how it has interacted with empirical research programs. Rather than treating “situated cognition” as a single doctrine, it surveys a cluster of related but distinct views—often labeled embodied, embedded, extended, enactive, and distributed—and the debates they have generated.

Situated approaches emerged against a background dominated by classical cognitivism, which construed the mind as an inner information-processing system manipulating symbolic representations according to rules. Proponents of situated views do not uniformly reject this framework. Some attempt to supplement traditional models with attention to bodily and environmental factors; others argue for more radical reconceptions of what cognition is.

These approaches raise questions about:

• where cognitive processes are located (only in the brain, or spread across body, tools, and social systems),
• how perception and action are organized (by internal models or through direct engagement with the world),
• and how knowledge and rationality depend on concrete practices and environments.

The entry traces historical antecedents and contemporary formulations, examines central arguments for and against different situated views, and outlines their implications for epistemology, metaphysics, cognitive science methodology, and neighboring disciplines. Throughout, it aims to present the main positions and controversies without taking a stand on their resolution.

2. Definition and Scope

Situated cognition is commonly defined as the view that cognitive processes are essentially shaped by, dependent on, or partially realized in an agent’s bodily capacities, physical environment, and social context. The emphasis on “essentially” is central: the claim is not merely that context influences thinking, but that certain forms of cognition cannot be adequately understood or even exist without their bodily and environmental embedding.

2.1 Narrow and Broad Definitions

Commentators distinguish narrower and broader usages:

Under the broad conception, situated cognition serves as a genus term, with embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive views as species that specify different ways in which cognition is situated.

2.2 Dimensions of Scope

The scope of situated cognition debates is often parsed along at least three dimensions:

• Bodily scope: To what extent do sensorimotor systems, posture, gesture, and morphology contribute constitutively to cognition?
• Environmental scope: How far do material artifacts, spatial layouts, and ecological regularities enter into the cognitive system rather than merely constraining it?
• Social scope: In what ways are cognitive processes dependent on participation in shared practices, languages, and institutional structures?

Some authors extend the scope further, including cultural, historical, and political structures as indispensable to understanding cognitive phenomena such as reasoning, memory, and agency.

2.3 Exclusions and Boundaries

Not every context-dependence thesis qualifies as situated cognition in the stronger sense. Many internalist theories accept that environment and body causally affect cognition but deny that they help constitute it. Debates over how to mark this boundary—often framed in terms of the coupling–constitution distinction—are central to delimiting the scope of situated cognition as a theoretical framework rather than a trivial observation that thinking occurs somewhere in the world.

3. The Core Question of Situated Cognition

At the heart of situated cognition lies a cluster of related questions about the location and nature of cognitive processes. These can be distilled into a core guiding question:

"

To what extent are cognitive processes essentially dependent on, or constituted by, an agent’s bodily capacities, physical environment, and social practices, rather than being solely internal, representation-based processes in the brain?

3.1 Dependence vs. Constitution

A central issue is whether body, environment, and social setting merely causally influence cognition or whether they are constitutive components of cognitive systems. Situated approaches typically maintain that at least some cognitive processes are:

• Constitutively embodied (partly realized in bodily states and skills),
• Constitutively embedded or extended (partly realized in tools, artifacts, or environmental structures),
• or Constitutively social (partly realized in practices and interactions among agents).

Critics often hold that these factors are at most enabling conditions or inputs/outputs to fundamentally internal processes.

3.2 Representation and Interaction

A further aspect of the core question concerns the role of internal representations. Classical cognitivism places representational states at the center of explanation. Situated approaches ask:

• Are rich, detailed internal models necessary, or can perception and action be explained through direct engagement with environmental affordances?
• Can dynamical patterns of organism–environment interaction replace, supplement, or presuppose internal representations?

Positions range from moderate views, which retain representations but stress their context-sensitivity, to radical enactivist and ecological views, which seek to minimize or eliminate representational posits.

3.3 Personal-Level and Subpersonal-Level Issues

The core question also has a personal-level dimension: How should we understand agency, responsibility, and knowledge if cognition is spread across body, tools, and social networks? Situated theorists ask whether traditional notions of the “individual thinker” or “knowing subject” require reconceptualization once cognition is treated as inherently situated.

These interconnected issues structure the main debates surveyed in subsequent sections, where different situated approaches propose distinct answers to the core question and its subcomponents.

4. Historical Origins and Precursors

Although the explicit term “situated cognition” is a late 20th‑century development, many of its central ideas have antecedents in earlier philosophical and scientific traditions. Historical work on situated cognition typically distinguishes between conceptual precursors and direct origins in cognitive science and educational research.

4.1 Conceptual Precursors

Several figures have been interpreted as early sources for situated themes:

These traditions emphasized practice, embodiment, and worldly involvement rather than detached inner representation, and later situated theorists often cite them as inspirations.

4.2 Emergence of the Term in Cognitive Science and Education

The phrase “situated cognition” gained prominence in the 1980s, initially in opposition to laboratory-based, decontextualized conceptions of problem solving and learning. Key contributors include:

• Jean Lave, whose work on everyday arithmetic and apprenticeship led to theories of situated learning and legitimate peripheral participation.
• Lucy Suchman, whose ethnographic study in Plans and Situated Actions argued that real-world action is improvised in context rather than fully governed by pre-existing plans.
• Edwin Hutchins, who developed distributed cognition in studies of navigation and cockpit operations, treating cognitive processes as spanning people and artifacts.

These research programs introduced methodological shifts—field studies, ethnography, focus on real-world tasks—that would shape broader situated perspectives.

4.3 Philosophical Uptake in the 1990s

In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, the 1990s saw the consolidation of embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive approaches. Authors such as Andy Clark, David Chalmers, Francisco Varela, and Alva Noë drew on both historical precursors and contemporary empirical work to formulate explicit theories of situated cognition.

While interpretations of historical figures remain contested—some scholars caution against reading modern notions back into earlier texts—the convergence of these lines of thought contributed to the contemporary landscape of situated cognition as a recognized research area.

5. Ancient and Classical Approaches

Ancient and classical philosophies did not articulate “situated cognition” in contemporary terms, but several influential doctrines bear strong family resemblances to later situated themes. Interpretive debates concern how far these views genuinely anticipate modern claims about embodiment and environment.

5.1 Plato and Intellectualist Traditions

Plato is often associated with a relatively internalist view of cognition, emphasizing the role of the immortal soul and abstract Forms. Yet even in Platonic dialogues, cognition is embedded in educational practices, political institutions, and dialogical encounters.

"

“We must take the finest of the young men to be spectators of war, and also, so far as safety permits, bring them into actual fighting.”

— Plato, Republic

Some scholars read such passages as acknowledging the role of practice and social setting in forming knowledge, whereas others see them as primarily instrumental to achieving context-independent intellectual insight.

5.2 Aristotle and Embodied Practical Reason

Aristotle’s account of soul (psuchē) and practical wisdom (phronesis) is often cited as a key precursor to situated cognition. For Aristotle:

• Cognition is inseparable from the capacities of a living body.
• Perception, desire, and movement are integrated in the practical syllogism, realized in concrete circumstances.
• Virtue and deliberation develop through habituation in specific social and political contexts.

These features have been interpreted as an early recognition that rational activity is situated in bodily life and the polis, though Aristotle also posits an intellectual component (the nous) with more abstract characteristics.

5.3 Hellenistic Schools

Stoics and Epicureans further explored the relation between mind and world. Stoic theories of impressions and assent stress continuous engagement with external events, while Epicurean atomism grounds perception in causal interactions with the environment. Both traditions regard cognitive error as arising from mismanagement of these situated engagements.

5.4 Classical Sources for Social and Political Situatedness

Classical reflections on rhetoric, education (paideia), and civic virtue—e.g., in Isocrates and later Roman thinkers—underscore that capacities for reasoning and judgment emerge within shared practices, institutions, and material arrangements of the city. Contemporary proponents of socially situated cognition sometimes draw analogies to these views, while also noting important differences in metaphysical commitments and scientific context.

6. Medieval and Early Modern Developments

Medieval and early modern thought introduced new frameworks for understanding cognition, some of which reinforced internalist tendencies while others preserved elements of embodiment and world-involvement.

6.1 Medieval Scholastic Accounts

Medieval scholastics such as Thomas Aquinas integrated Aristotelian psychology with Christian theology. Aquinas’s view of intellectual cognition combined:

• Embodied faculties: Sensory and imaginative powers rooted in the body play necessary preparatory roles.
• Abstraction: The intellect abstracts universal forms from phantasms, suggesting a move toward internal, immaterial operations.
• World involvement: Forms informing the intellect are ultimately derived from worldly substances.

Historians disagree on whether this amounts to a proto-internalist picture or a still thoroughly world-embedded one, since the mind’s contents remain ontologically tied to extra-mental forms.

6.2 Early Modern Internalism and Mechanism

Early modern philosophy is often seen as a turning point toward a more sharply inner conception of mind. Key developments include:

These positions foreground mental representations and epistemic access to inner states. Bodily and environmental conditions are frequently treated as sources of input rather than integral components of cognitive processing.

6.3 Countercurrents: Pragmatism and Phenomenology

Late 19th- and early 20th‑century thinkers began to challenge purified internalism:

• William James conceived of consciousness as a “stream” of activity connected to bodily states and practical interests.
• John Dewey framed thought as an instrument for coping with problematic situations, emphasizing organism–environment transactions.
• Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty developed accounts of being-in-the-world and embodied perception, presenting skilled coping and motor intentionality as fundamental.

These movements supplied many of the conceptual resources later taken up by situated cognition theorists, especially the idea that cognition is grounded in practical, bodily engagement rather than detached representation.

7. From Cognitivism to Situated Approaches

Situated cognition emerged in explicit dialogue with mid-20th‑century cognitivism, which modeled the mind as an information-processing system. The transition involved both empirical pressures and conceptual critiques.

7.1 Classical Cognitivism

Postwar cognitive science, influenced by computer science and formal logic, adopted a computational–representational view of mind:

• Cognition is manipulation of internal symbolic representations.
• Perception provides input; action produces output.
• Context is typically encoded as information within the system.

This framework yielded influential models of language, reasoning, and problem solving.

7.2 Challenges from Real-World Cognition

From the 1970s onward, empirical work began to highlight discrepancies between laboratory tasks and everyday activity:

• Studies of expertise, navigation, and industrial work demonstrated heavy reliance on environmental structures and tools.
• Robotics research encountered difficulties building systems that could act flexibly in unconstrained environments using only pre-programmed representations.

Such findings motivated claims that cognition in the wild is opportunistic and context-sensitive, often offloading work onto the environment.

7.3 Emergence of Situated Research Programs

In the 1980s and 1990s, several research lines crystallized:

These programs often retained some computational language but shifted explanatory emphasis from internal symbol manipulation to agent–environment systems.

7.4 Philosophical Generalization

Philosophers drew broader conclusions from these developments, developing embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive theories that reconceived the very nature of cognition. Responses from defenders of classical cognitivism ranged from accommodation (treating situated factors as inputs/constraints) to resistance (defending a strict internalist boundary). The resulting debates structure much of the contemporary discussion of situated cognition.

8. Embodied, Embedded, Extended, and Enactive Views

Within the broader situated cognition landscape, four interrelated but distinct approaches—often collectively called 4E cognition—provide more fine-grained theses about how cognition is situated.

8.1 Embodied Cognition

Embodied cognition holds that the body’s morphology, sensorimotor capacities, and physiological states are not mere peripheral inputs and outputs but play constitutive roles in cognitive processes.

Key claims include:

• Cognitive representations (where posited) are shaped by bodily formats.
• Motor systems contribute directly to activities such as reasoning and language understanding.
• Emotion and affect, grounded in bodily processes, structure judgment and decision-making.

Empirical support is drawn from studies of gesture in problem solving, motor involvement in conceptual tasks, and sensorimotor contingencies. Critics argue that many such effects are causal rather than constitutive and can be accommodated within internalist frameworks.

8.2 Embedded Cognition

Embedded cognition emphasizes that cognitive systems are deeply dependent on environmental structures:

• Agents routinely offload memory and computation onto external media.
• Stable environmental features (e.g., spatial layouts, tools) serve as scaffolds that simplify internal processing.
• Organisms exploit affordances directly available in their surroundings.

Embedded views generally retain an internal core to cognition but stress that real-world thinking is inseparable from its ecological niche. Debates center on how to distinguish embeddedness from ordinary causal dependence.

8.3 Extended Cognition

The extended mind thesis is more radical, proposing that, under appropriate conditions, external devices and structures literally form part of an individual’s cognitive system.

A widely discussed formulation relies on the parity principle: if an external process plays the same functional role as an internal one and is reliably accessible, it should be treated as cognitive. Examples include long-term reliance on notebooks, smartphones, or software tools.

Critics advance the coupling–constitution objection and raise worries about cognitive bloat, arguing that parity-based criteria risk overextending the boundaries of mind to include almost any interacting artifact.

8.4 Enactive Cognition

Enactivism conceives cognition as sense-making carried out by autonomous, self-organizing systems through ongoing interaction with their environments.

Core commitments include:

• Organisms enact a meaningful world through their practical engagements.
• Cognition is modelled via dynamical systems, emphasizing patterns of interaction rather than discrete representations.
• Perception is active exploration; action and perception are co-constitutive.

Some enactivists downplay or reject internal representations, while others allow for more moderate representational elements. Critics question whether enactivism can account for offline thought, imagination, and abstract reasoning, and whether its key notions (e.g., autopoiesis) can be made empirically tractable.

9. Distributed Cognition and Social Context

Distributed cognition extends situated themes to systems involving multiple agents and artifacts, focusing on how cognitive processes are organized across social and material networks.

9.1 Core Ideas of Distributed Cognition

Originally developed by Edwin Hutchins, distributed cognition treats cognitive phenomena as properties of socio-technical systems rather than isolated individuals. On this view:

• Representational states can be located in artifacts (charts, instruments) as well as in individual brains.
• Cognitive tasks are accomplished by coordinated activity among people and tools.
• The unit of analysis is the functional system engaged in a task (e.g., a ship’s navigation team), not any single mind.

"

“Cognitive processes may be distributed across the members of a social group, across internal and external structures, and across time.”

— E. Hutchins, Cognition in the Wild

9.2 Social Practices and Cultural Tools

Distributed approaches highlight the role of:

• Cultural artifacts (writing systems, diagrams, software) that stabilize and transmit information.
• Social practices and norms that structure how people coordinate, such as procedures, roles, and routines.
• Language as both a medium and a tool for joint problem solving.

These factors are seen as integral to how reasoning, memory, and decision-making occur in real settings.

9.3 Situated Social Cognition

Beyond formal distributed cognition theory, work on socially situated cognition investigates how individual cognitive capacities are shaped by:

• Participation in communities of practice,
• Institutional arrangements,
• Power relations and division of labor.

Some theorists propose that certain cognitive capacities—e.g., understanding social norms or engaging in joint action—are inherently relational, existing only within patterns of interaction. Others maintain that while social context is crucial causally and developmentally, cognitive processes are ultimately realized in individual nervous systems.

The extent to which distributed and social factors are constitutive of cognition thus mirrors broader debates within situated cognition about boundaries of cognitive systems.

10. Methodological Implications for Cognitive Science

Situated cognition has motivated significant methodological reorientations in cognitive science, affecting experimental design, modeling strategies, and units of analysis.

10.1 From Laboratory Tasks to Real-World Activity

Proponents argue that traditional cognitive science often studies decontextualized tasks (e.g., paper-and-pencil puzzles) that obscure how cognition actually unfolds in everyday environments. Methodological shifts include:

• Ethnographic and field studies of work, learning, and navigation.
• Analysis of naturalistic tasks involving real tools and social interaction.
• Emphasis on ecological validity, seeking settings where agent–environment coupling is preserved.

Critics of this shift caution that uncontrolled environments complicate causal inference and may limit the generalizability of findings.

10.2 New Units and Levels of Analysis

Situated approaches frequently advocate treating agent–environment systems or socio-technical ensembles as primary units of analysis. This has methodological consequences:

The appropriateness of these units is debated, with some researchers suggesting a pluralistic stance where level and unit selection depends on explanatory aims.

10.3 Dynamical and Ecological Modeling

Situated cognition has encouraged adoption of:

• Dynamical systems models, representing cognition as trajectories in high-dimensional state spaces coupling neural, bodily, and environmental variables.
• Ecological psychology methods that focus on detecting affordances and information patterns available in the environment.

Supporters contend these frameworks capture real-time, continuous interaction better than discrete symbol-processing models. Critics argue that dynamical descriptions can be descriptive without being explanatory unless linked to mechanisms.

10.4 Human–Computer Interaction and Design

In applied domains, situated perspectives inform user-centered design, cognitive ergonomics, and human–computer interaction, emphasizing:

• Design of artifacts that integrate smoothly into existing practices.
• Analysis of how interfaces become parts of extended or distributed cognitive systems.

This has practical consequences for evaluating cognitive technologies, though disagreements remain about whether these should be seen as literally cognitive or as external aids to internal processes.

11. Epistemological and Metaphysical Issues

Situating cognition in body, environment, and social practices raises fundamental questions about knowledge and the nature of mind.

11.1 Epistemological Questions

Situated approaches intersect with epistemology in several ways:

• Situated knowledge: Feminist and social epistemologists argue that knowing is shaped by the knower’s position within social and material structures. This resonates with claims that cognition depends on practices and tools.
• Reliability and external resources: Extended and embedded views prompt questions about when reliance on notebooks, instruments, or other agents can underpin genuine knowledge rather than mere belief.
• Epistemic agency and control: If cognitive processes span external artifacts or social systems, debates arise about how to attribute epistemic responsibility and credit.

Some theorists propose expanded notions of epistemic subjects (e.g., collectives, human–machine systems), while others insist that knowledge is ultimately attributable to individuals with appropriate internal states.

11.2 Metaphysics of Mind and Cognitive Boundaries

Metaphysical debates focus on the ontological status and boundaries of cognitive systems:

• Vehicle externalism (e.g., extended mind) suggests that the physical realizers of mental states can include external devices.
• Content externalism (familiar from analytic philosophy) holds that mental content depends on environment but keeps vehicles internal.
• Internalists claim that while content may be externally individuated, the realization of cognitive states is confined to the brain and body.

Key issues include:

• Criteria for when coupling becomes constitution (e.g., reliability, accessibility, integration).
• Avoiding cognitive bloat while acknowledging robust external contributions.
• The relationship between personal-level phenomena (beliefs, intentions) and subpersonal mechanisms spread over systems.

11.3 Identity, Persistence, and Personhood

If cognitive processes and perhaps some mental states are partly realized outside the biological organism, further metaphysical questions arise:

• How do we individuate persons and minds over time if their cognitive profiles depend on changing artifacts and social relations?
• Can extended or distributed systems ground psychological continuity relevant to personal identity?

Views diverge sharply. Some see situated cognition as compatible with traditional personal identity criteria (e.g., continuity of memory and character, even if partly scaffolded), while others explore more revisionary accounts where persons are inherently networked entities embedded in social and material worlds.

12. Critiques and Defenses of Situated Cognition

Situated cognition has generated extensive critique and counter-argument across philosophy and cognitive science. Disputes often turn on how strong the situated claims are and what counts as explanatory success.

12.1 Major Criticisms

Key objections include:

• Triviality and overextension: Critics argue that weak situated theses (e.g., “context matters”) are trivial, while strong ones (e.g., extended mind) risk counting almost any interacting factor as cognitive.
• Coupling–constitution distinction: Many maintain that external bodies, tools, and social factors are merely causally coupled to cognitive processes, not constitutive parts. On this view, brain-based processes remain the genuine locus of cognition.
• Empirical underdetermination: Some contend that classical internalist models can reproduce the same behavioral data by treating environmental and social structures as inputs, leaving the choice between internalist and situated explanations underdetermined.
• Explanatory vagueness: Concepts such as affordances, sense-making, or autopoiesis are sometimes criticized as too indeterminate to support precise predictions or mechanistic explanations.
• Offline cognition: Enactive and strongly embodied views are often challenged for allegedly struggling to explain imagination, counterfactual reasoning, and abstract mathematical thought.

12.2 Defenses and Replies

Proponents offer several lines of defense:

• Explanatory payoff: They argue that models acknowledging embodiment, environmental scaffolding, or social distribution offer more accurate descriptions of real-world activity, especially in complex, time-sensitive tasks.
• Non-trivial criteria: Extended mind theorists propose conditions such as reliability, automaticity, integration, and user endorsement to prevent cognitive bloat and distinguish genuine extension from mere causal influence.
• Dynamical alternatives: Enactivists and dynamical systems theorists contend that interaction-based models capture patterns of behavior that would otherwise require implausibly rich internal representations.
• Normative and epistemic considerations: Some defenses emphasize that recognizing situated and social dimensions of cognition clarifies how epistemic agency and responsibility are actually distributed in scientific practice, organizations, and technological systems.

12.3 Internalist Countermoves and Hybrid Theories

In response to situated critiques, internalists have developed:

• Hybrid models that incorporate embodiment and environmental structure as constraints while keeping computation and representation internal.
• Predictive processing and related frameworks, which allow for tight brain–body–world coupling yet treat internal generative models as central.

Some theorists advocate pluralism, holding that both internalist and situated explanations have legitimate roles depending on scale and target phenomenon. Others see this as sidestepping core metaphysical questions about the true boundaries of cognition.

13. Interdisciplinary Applications in Science, Religion, and Politics

Situated cognition has influenced research and theorizing well beyond philosophy and core cognitive science, shaping approaches in scientific practice studies, religious studies, and political theory.

13.1 Scientific Practice and Cognitive Science of Science

In the study of science itself, situated and distributed cognition perspectives emphasize:

• Laboratory practices: Instruments, diagrams, and inscriptions are treated as integral to scientific reasoning rather than merely recording pre-formed thoughts.
• Collaborative cognition: Team-based problem solving in experimental groups and large collaborations is analyzed as distributed across people and artifacts.
• Modeling and simulation: Computer models and visualization tools are viewed as components of extended cognitive systems that scientists use to explore hypotheses.

These approaches intersect with sociology of scientific knowledge and science studies, complementing but sometimes challenging more individualistic accounts of scientific rationality.

13.2 Religion and Ritual

In religion, situated cognition informs:

• Practice-based accounts of faith: Theological and philosophical views that understand religious commitment as enacted through ritual, liturgy, and communal practices.
• Embodied worship: Analyses of posture, gesture, and sacred spaces as shaping religious experience and cognition.
• Cognitive science of religion: Empirical work examining how beliefs, memories, and emotions are scaffolded by material culture (icons, texts, architecture) and social ceremonies.

Some scholars argue that these approaches highlight the importance of ritualized bodily action and shared narratives in sustaining religious cognition, while others caution against reducing religious experience to situated mechanisms alone.

13.3 Politics, Agency, and Social Structures

In political theory and related fields, situated cognition supports reconsideration of agency and rationality:

• Situated rationality in policy and economics: Models of decision-making that account for informational environments, institutional rules, and technological infrastructures.
• Feminist and decolonial perspectives: Emphasis on situated knowledges and how cognition is shaped by power relations, marginalization, and access to resources.
• Collective and institutional agency: Analyses of how organizations, bureaucracies, and socio-technical systems may exhibit forms of cognition distributed across members and artifacts.

These applications raise questions about responsibility, democratic participation, and justice when cognitive capacities are unevenly supported or constrained by social and material conditions. Some theorists welcome this as a more realistic picture of political agency, while others worry about diluting individual accountability.

14. Future Directions and Open Problems

Situated cognition continues to evolve, with several prominent lines of ongoing inquiry and unresolved issues.

14.1 Clarifying Theoretical Commitments

One open problem concerns conceptual clarification:

• How precisely should “embodiment,” “embeddedness,” “extension,” and “enaction” be defined?
• Can unified criteria for constitutive vs. causal roles of environment and body be formulated?
• Is “situated cognition” best understood as a single research program or a loose collection of partially overlapping theses?

Some researchers aim to articulate a more integrated framework (e.g., “4E cognition”), while others advocate maintaining distinct strands to preserve theoretical diversity.

14.2 Integration with Neuroscience and AI

A further direction involves deeper engagement with neuroscience and artificial intelligence:

• How do neural mechanisms implement or interact with extended and distributed cognitive systems?
• Can predictive processing, active inference, or other contemporary neuroscientific frameworks be reconciled with enactivist or ecological approaches?
• In AI and robotics, to what extent do successful systems require embodiment and rich environmental coupling, as opposed to powerful internal models?

Empirical results in these areas may bear on the plausibility of stronger vs. weaker situated claims.

14.3 Normativity, Value, and Ethics

Situated cognition raises questions about normativity:

• How are cognitive norms (e.g., rationality, justification) affected when cognition is socially and materially scaffolded?
• What ethical responsibilities arise in designing technological and institutional environments that support or impair cognitive functioning?

These questions connect situated cognition with neuroethics, technology ethics, and political philosophy.

14.4 Individual, Collective, and Hybrid Agents

Debates continue about:

• The status of collective cognitive agents (e.g., research teams, institutions) and whether they possess genuine cognitive states.
• How to understand hybrid human–machine systems, such as users of brain–computer interfaces or pervasive digital assistants.
• The implications of increasingly integrated digital infrastructures (cloud services, AI tools) for the boundaries and persistence of minds.

Resolution of these issues may require new metaphysical and epistemological tools, as well as empirical work on how humans interact with emerging technologies.

14.5 Methodological Pluralism and Evaluation

Finally, there are open questions about how to evaluate situated theories relative to internalist alternatives:

• What counts as decisive empirical support when multiple modeling frameworks can fit the same data?
• Should cognitive science adopt an explicit methodological pluralism, or seek a unified paradigm?

These unresolved questions ensure that situated cognition remains an active and contested area of research rather than a settled doctrine.

15. Legacy and Historical Significance

Situated cognition has had a substantial impact on how philosophers and cognitive scientists conceive of mind, even among those who reject its stronger claims.

15.1 Shifts in the Understanding of Mind

Historically, the situated turn contributed to a movement away from viewing cognition as:

• exclusively internal,
• predominantly language-like symbol manipulation,
• and largely independent of bodily and environmental factors.

It foregrounded action, practice, and context as central to understanding cognitive phenomena, influencing subsequent developments such as 4E cognition, predictive processing theories that emphasize active engagement, and renewed interest in ecological and dynamical approaches.

15.2 Methodological and Interdisciplinary Influence

Situated perspectives helped legitimize:

• Field studies, ethnography, and workplace analyses within cognitive science.
• Collaboration between philosophy, anthropology, human–computer interaction, and educational research.
• The treatment of artifacts and social structures as serious topics for cognitive-theoretic analysis.

These methodological innovations have left a lasting imprint on how research programs are designed and evaluated.

15.3 Reframing Epistemology and Social Theory

In epistemology and social theory, situated cognition intersected with and reinforced movements emphasizing:

• The social and material dimensions of knowledge production,
• The importance of position, embodiment, and power relations in understanding rationality,
• The role of technology and infrastructure in shaping cognitive capacities.

This has contributed to broader philosophical conversations about agency, responsibility, and collective intelligence.

15.4 Ongoing Debates as Part of the Legacy

The enduring controversies—over extended mind, enactivism, distributed cognition, and the proper boundaries of the cognitive—are themselves part of the legacy of situated cognition. They have compelled defenders of traditional internalist views to refine their positions, address environmental and social scaffolds more explicitly, and reconsider assumptions about what it means to theorize the mind scientifically.

In this way, situated cognition’s historical significance lies not only in the positive theories it has introduced but also in the enduring questions it has pressed about where and what cognition is.