Abstract

Chapter 2 and Chapter 4, Casper’s “A Methodological Problem of Choice for 4E Research” and Sanches de Oliveira’s “Explanatory Diversity and Embodied Cognitive Science: Reflexivity Motivates Pluralism”, seem to address the same issue: the plurality of methods in the 4E debate. On the one hand, my contribution considers this plurality a severe challenge for 4E researchers and their future studies – since it implies the question of whether and how different methodical approaches and their results can connect on an interdisciplinary level. Sanches de Oliveira, on the other hand, intends to offer a description of this plurality under which such problems disappear. In this comment I point out four problematic aspects of his account.