Uploaded June 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 minutes ago
Five philosophers and neuroscientists discuss what representation means for brains and minds.
Show notes: braininspired.co/podcast/213
Patreon (full episodes and Discord community): patreon.com/braininspired
Apple podcasts: itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/brain-inspired/id1428880766?mt=2
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2UZj8c8Ap5oc2gh2rJxLLe
Music by @dunovank
The Transmitter is an online publication that aims to deliver useful information, insights and tools to build bridges across neuroscience and advance research. Visit thetransmitter.org to explore the latest neuroscience news and perspectives, written by journalists and scientists.
Read more about our partnership: thetransmitter.org/partners
Check out this series of essays about representations:
What are we talking about? Clarifying the fuzzy concept of representation in neuroscience and beyond: thetransmitter.org/defining-representations/what-are-we-talking-about-clarifying-the-fuzzy-concept-of-representation-in-neuroscience-and-beyond
Sign up for the “Brain Inspired” email alerts to be notified every time a new “Brain Inspired” episode is released: thetransmitter.org/newsletters
To explore more neuroscience news and perspectives, visit thetransmitter.org.
What do neuroscientists mean when they use the term representation? That's part of what Luis Favela and Edouard Machery set out to answer a couple years ago by surveying lots of folks in the cognitive sciences, and they concluded that as a field the term is used in a confused and unclear way. Confused and unclear are technical terms here, and Luis and Edouard explain what they mean in the episode. More recently Luis and Edouard wrote a follow-up piece arguing that maybe it's okay for everyone to use the term in slightly different ways, maybe it helps communication across disciplines, perhaps. My three other guests today, Frances Egan, Rosa Cao, and John Krakauer wrote responses to that argument, and on today's episode all those folks are here to further discuss that issue and why it matters. Luis is a part philosopher, part cognitive scientists at Indiana University Bloomington, Edouard is a philosopher and Director of the Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh, Frances is a philosopher from Rutgers University, Rosa is a neuroscientist-turned philosopher at Stanford University, and John is a neuroscientist among other things, and co-runs the Brain, Learning, Animation, and Movement Lab at Johns Hopkins.
0:00 - Intro
3:55 - What is a representation to a neuroscientist?
14:44 - How to deal with the dilemma
21:20 - Opposing views
31:00 - What's at stake?
51:10 - Neural-only representation
1:01:11 - When "representation" is playing a useful role
1:12:56 - The role of a neuroscientist
1:39:35 - The purpose of "representational talk"
1:53:03 - Non-representational mental phenomenon
1:55:53 - Final thoughts
Five philosophers and neuroscientists discuss what representation means for brains and minds.
Show notes: braininspired.co/podcast/213
Patreon (full episodes and Discord community): patreon.com/braininspired
Apple podcasts: itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/brain-inspired/id1428880766?mt=2
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2UZj8c8Ap5oc2gh2rJxLLe
Music by @dunovank
The Transmitter is an online publication that aims to deliver useful information, insights and tools to build bridges across neuroscience and advance research. Visit thetransmitter.org to explore the latest neuroscience news and perspectives, written by journalists and scientists.
Read more about our partnership: thetransmitter.org/partners
Check out this series of essays about representations:
What are we talking about? Clarifying the fuzzy concept of representation in neuroscience and beyond: thetransmitter.org/defining-representations/what-are-we-talking-about-clarifying-the-fuzzy-concept-of-representation-in-neuroscience-and-beyond
Sign up for the “Brain Inspired” email alerts to be notified every time a new “Brain Inspired” episode is released: thetransmitter.org/newsletters
To explore more neuroscience news and perspectives, visit thetransmitter.org.
What do neuroscientists mean when they use the term representation? That's part of what Luis Favela and Edouard Machery set out to answer a couple years ago by surveying lots of folks in the cognitive sciences, and they concluded that as a field the term is used in a confused and unclear way. Confused and unclear are technical terms here, and Luis and Edouard explain what they mean in the episode. More recently Luis and Edouard wrote a follow-up piece arguing that maybe it's okay for everyone to use the term in slightly different ways, maybe it helps communication across disciplines, perhaps. My three other guests today, Frances Egan, Rosa Cao, and John Krakauer wrote responses to that argument, and on today's episode all those folks are here to further discuss that issue and why it matters. Luis is a part philosopher, part cognitive scientists at Indiana University Bloomington, Edouard is a philosopher and Director of the Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh, Frances is a philosopher from Rutgers University, Rosa is a neuroscientist-turned philosopher at Stanford University, and John is a neuroscientist among other things, and co-runs the Brain, Learning, Animation, and Movement Lab at Johns Hopkins.
0:00 - Intro
3:55 - What is a representation to a neuroscientist?
14:44 - How to deal with the dilemma
21:20 - Opposing views
31:00 - What's at stake?
51:10 - Neural-only representation
1:01:11 - When "representation" is playing a useful role
1:12:56 - The role of a neuroscientist
1:39:35 - The purpose of "representational talk"
1:53:03 - Non-representational mental phenomenon
1:55:53 - Final thoughts
