Image 01

Mario Villalobos

I studied medicine and psychology as undergraduate student. My master degree was in epistemology and the title of my dissertation was “Esbozo para una fundamentacion epistemologica del componente critico en ciencias sociales”. Based on this dissertation I published a book on Marxist epistemology titled “Social science as social critique: the epistemological revolution of Karl Marx”. All this academic formation was developed in Chile. Now I am doing a PhD (philosophy) at the University of Edinburgh. The title of my thesis is (so far) “Human cognition: biologically founded, culturally mediated”. My main interest is to develop a theory of mind from an autopoietic point of view, using as a complement the semiotic-cultural theory of Vygotsky. I take the autopoietic theory in its original formulation (Maturana’s biology of cognition), not in its phenomenological derivation (Varela’s enactive theory). From an autopoietic point of view life is sufficient for cognition (life = cognition), but not for mind (life ≠ mind). In the autopoietic theory, as opposed to the enactive theory, there is no continuity between life and mind. Instead, mind is a social linguistic product, where language is understood as a recursive domain of behavioural coordination. In other words, from the autopoietic theory the mind is a social emergence linked to the emergence of language. This idea seems quite consistent with the social-semiotic approach of Soviet psychological school.

Discussion Topic: Spontaneity versus Teleology: Are living systems really teleological systems? Is life-cognition continuity equal to life-mind continuity?

Occupation: PhD student
Status: Non-Member

Posts by mario:

    No posts by this author.