Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze some arguments against the coupling-constitution fallacy, one of the most common objection to the extended mind and the extended consciousness hypotheses. Along the way, I will try to emphasize two conflicting but essential requirements: on the one hand, many authors feel the need to identify an explicit criterion for recognizing what is really cognitive, conscious or mental; on the other hand, there is also the legitimate demand for establishing without any vicious circle where cognitive, conscious or mental states and processes are physically realized. As a conclusion, I will suggest that in order to bring together both the above constraints, it is necessary to 182