Abstract

Fred Adams : 619–628, 2010) criticizes the theory of embodied cognition which holds that conceptual and linguistic thought is grounded in the brain’s perceptual and sensorimotor systems. Among other things, Adams claims that: EC is potentially committed to an implausible criterion of sentence meaningfulness; EC lacks claimed advantages over rival accounts of conceptual thought; relevant experimental data do not show constitutive, but only causal, involvement of perception in conception; and EC cannot account for the comprehension of abstract concepts. I respond to Adams that: EC is not committed to an implausible criterion of meaningfulness, though it may be committed to holding that comprehension admits of degrees; EC does have its claimed advantages over rival views; the data do make a strong case for constitutive involvement and a broad and comprehensive EC approach probably can account for the comprehension of abstract concepts