<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Whose body matters?</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Nicholas Humphrey humphrey@me.com</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Frederique de Vignemont</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Giacomo Rizzolatti &amp; Josef Perner</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Minoru Asada</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Which body do I feel as my own? The body in which I feel sensations? But I can feel sensations in a hand that feels as alien. The body I can directly control? But more and more evidence shows that tools can be motorically embodied, and yet I do not feel tools as parts of my body, while most versions of the Rubber Hand Illusion are purely perceptual with no agentive component. Or the body that matters for selfpreservation, and thus that has a special affective significance for me? According to a classic conception in social psychology, one does not feel patriotic when one is merely aware of the boundaries of one's country; one feels patriotic when one is aware that these boundaries can be in danger. I propose here that something similar applies to the sense of bodily ownership. Part 1: Mirrors − Giacomo Rizzolatti Action understanding has received and enormous interest in the fields of cognitive neuroscience over last two decades. In particular, the presence of motor activation during the observation of actions done by others when these are part of the motor repertoire of the observer, aroused a lot of discussion. In my talk I will show that the mirror mechanism is a general mechanism that include emotions and vitality forms. The proposal is that the perception of actions, emotions and vitality forms is determined by the activation of the motor programs responsible for that action. There is no need of independent centers for perception of action. Additional mechanisms, however, are required when the observed action is not encoded by the observer's motor system.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>In English we use the word “invention” in two ways: 1. A new
device or process developed by experimentation, and designed
to fulfill a practical goal. 2. A mental fabrication, especially a
falsehood, developed by art, and designed to please or
persuade. In this talk I’ll argue that human consciousness is
an invention in both respects. 1. It is a cognitive faculty,
evolved by natural selection, that improves our practical
ability to understand the world we live in. 2. It is a fantasy,
evolved by something more like sexual selection, that
motivates us to live more fulfilling lives.</p>
      <p>Social cognition: mirrors and perspectives (joint
lecture)
We have been advocating cognitive developmental robotics
(hereafter, CDR) to obtain new insight into the development
of human cognitive functions by utilizing synthetic and
constructive approaches. Among the different emotional
functions, empathy is difficult to model, but essential for
robots to be social agents in our society. Several attempts have
been made for specific situations. However, such attempts
have provided several limitations; thus, diminishing
authenticity. In this talk, I introduce "affective developmental
robotics (hereafter, ADR),” which provides more authentic
artificial empathy based on the concept of CDR. First, the
evolution and development of empathy as revealed in
neuroscience and biobehavioral studies are reviewed, moving
from emotional contagion to envy and schadenfreude. These
terms are then reconsidered from the ADR/CDR viewpoint,
particularly along the developmental trajectory of self-other
cognition. Next, a conceptual model of artificial empathy is
proposed based on an ADR/CDR viewpoint and discussed
with respect to several existing studies. Finally, a general
discussion and proposals for addressing future issues are
given.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list />
  </back>
</article>