Imagine entering a world where everything is unknown. You are surrounded by floating formations in many colors. There is no floor, no help, no familiar tasks to perform.
‘What do you do?’
“We usually think we cope with new situations by thinking and planning. That, however, is not the whole truth,” says Martin Peter Pleiss, a researcher at the RITMO Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Rhythm, Time and Motion at the University of Oslo.
The brain does not operate on its own
While science has historically given the brain almost all the credit for human cognition, that view is changing. Since the early 2000s, awareness has grown of the role of the human body.
For instance, researchers have found that motor areas of the brain are activated during language comprehension, and that our body posture can affect memory.
In cognitive science and philosophy, the term 4E cognition – introduced in 2007 – has taken hold. It refers to a family of theories that emphasize how cognition depends on the body and its environment.
“This framework takes seriously that we are bodies moving through environments, not just brains processing inputs,” Pleiss says, adding that the concept of embodied cognition has deep historical roots.
What happens when everything is unknown?
Read more here.
Photo: Annica Thomsson
As a scientific framework, 4E cognition has broadened views of cognition, making them less individualistic and more holistic. It acknowledges that we are strongly influenced by the world outside us.
Still, most research focuses on tasks closely related to everyday life or reactions to simplified stimuli in a lab, Pleiss notes.
“I wanted to find out what happens when all the usual orientation supports are stripped away – for example, if you arrive at a playground built for aliens or enter an undiscovered landscape with totally different laws of nature,” he says.
Participants explored a virtual reality
For his PhD, Pleiss exposed people to the ultra-unknown using virtual reality (VR). Participants wore VR headsets and took a five-minute journey into the interactive art installation Mutator VR Vortex.
In that world, everything floats and nothing is familiar — just as described at the start of this story.
“What was fascinating was that even in this completely alien situation, people weren’t paralyzed,” Pleiss says.
He expected participants to search for meaning – to ask, “What is this?” or “What does it remind me of?”
Instead, in interviews afterwards, they described feeling drawn in and compelled to explore before they could even say what they were curious about.
They used their bodies to get oriented
“They tried to figure out the situation by doing things. They reached out, moved closer, and tested what they could do. They used their bodies,” Pleiss says.
Their descriptions reminded him of babies and small children who actively use their senses and bodies in a new world.
“It seems adults retain a primal awareness of what the body can do. That these patterns appear so clearly suggests we don’t outgrow this capacity – it remains foundational throughout life.”
Even in an abstract, non-social environment, sensemaking appeared shaped by intersubjectivity, Pleiss adds.
“Participants treated objects as if they might respond like beings. It seems we are always orienting toward potential others.”
Suggestion: Make room for bodily exploration
Phenomenologists and proponents of 4E cognition have long argued that humans do not passively receive sensory input; rather, we are constantly active. We don’t just see the world – we do our way through it.
“My study shows this happening in real time,” Pleiss says.
He believes his and related studies have clear implications for designers of educational tools, museum exhibits, therapeutic environments, and workplace training.
“When we face novelty, we need opportunities for bodily exploration, not just information. We need to actively explore how the new thing relates to us.”
Humans are well equipped
Pleiss thinks the findings also have implications for how we think about artificial intelligence (AI).
“If understanding novelty requires the capacity to act in ways that matter to oneself – to test possibilities, feel consequences, and build a sense of self through doing – then we must ask: can an artificial mind that lacks this bodily stake in the world truly understand the new?”
Pleiss finds something quietly hopeful in the results.
“We tend to fear the unknown. But this research suggests we’re remarkably well-equipped for it.”