The aim of this article is to examine and defend videogame cognitivism (VC). According to VC, videogames can be a source of cognitive successes (such as true beliefs, knowledge or understanding) for their players. While the possibility of videogame-based learning has been an extensive topic of discussion in the last decades, the epistemological underpinnings of these debates often remain unclear. I propose that VC is a domain-specific brand of aesthetic cognitivism, which should be carefully distinguished from other views that also insist on the cognitive or educational potential of videogames. After these clarifications, I discuss and assess different broad strategies to motivate VC: propositionalism, experientialism, and neocognitivism. These map the different ways in which videogames can prove epistemically valuable, showing them to be, respectively, sources of propositional knowledge, experiential knowledge, and understanding. I eventually argue that neocognitivism is a particularly promising and yet underexplored way to defend VC.
bits studios (2014). This War of Mine
k Games et al (2007). BioShock
Bethesda Game Studios (2015). Fallout IV
Black Isle, (2000). Baldur’s Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Blizzard Entertainment (1998). StarCraft
Blizzard Entertainment (2014). Hearthstone
Dermuth (2013). Antichamber
Electronic Arts (2001). Black & White
Electronic Arts (2019). Fifa 20
Frasca, Gonzalo (2003). September 12th
Frictional Games (2015). SOMA
Gualeni, Stefano et al. (2017). Something Something Soup Something
Green, Ryan & Larson, Josh (2016). That Dragon, Cancer
Namco (1980). Pac-Man
Namco (2004). Tekken 5
Naughty Dog (2013). The Last of Us
Nintendo (1990). Super Mario World
Nintendo (2006). Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day!
Paradox Interactive (2012). Crusader Kings II
Pope, Lucas (2013). Papers, Please
Rockstar Games (2013). Grand Theft Auto V.
SCS Software (2012). Euro Truck Simulator 2
Squad (2011). Kerbal Space Program
Square Enix (2016). Hitman
Square Enix (2015). Life is Strange
Studio MDHR (2017). Cuphead
Yager Development (2012). Spec Ops: The Line
Valve (2007). Portal
ZA/UM (2019). Disco Elysium
Baumberger, C., Beisbart, C. & Brun, G. (2017). What is Understanding? An Overview of Recent Debates in Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. In Grimm S., Baumberger, C., & Ammon, S. (Eds.), Explaining Understanding: New Perspectives from Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge: 1–34.
Baumberger, C. (2013). Art and Understanding. In Defence of Aesthetic. Cognitivism. In Greenlee, M. et alii (Eds.), Bilder sehen. Perspektiven der Bildwissenschaft. Regensburg: Schnell + Steiner: 41–67.
Bogost, I. (2010). Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bogost, I. (2015). How to Talk About Videogames. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Blumson, B. (2015). Fact, Fiction, and Fantasy. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 39(1), 46–57.
Caillois, R. (1961). Man, Play and Games. Chicago: University of Illinois.
Cath, Y. (2019). Knowing What It is Like and Testimony. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 97(1), 105–120.
Carroll, N. (2002). The Wheel of Virtue: Art, Literature, and Moral Knowledge”, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 60(1), 3–26.
Carroll, N. (2011). Philosophical Insight, Emotion, and Popular Fiction: The Case of Sunset Boulevard. In Carroll, N. & Gibson, J. (Eds.), Narrative, Emotion, and Insight (pp.161-182), The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Chalmers, D. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Conee, E. & Feldman, R. (2008). Evidence. In Smith, Q. (Ed.), Epistemology: New Essays (pp.83–104), Oxford University Press.
Currie, G. (1995). Imagination and Simulation: Aesthetics Meets Cognitive Science. In Davies, M. & Stone, T. (Eds.), Mental Simulation, (pp.151–169), Blackwell.
Davies, D. (2007). Aesthetics and Literature. London & New York: Continuum.
Declos, A. (2020). Fact, Fiction, and Virtual Worlds. In Pouivet, R. & Granata, V. (Eds.), Épistémologie de l’esthétique (pp. 195-219), Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Eichenbaum, A., Bavelier, D. & Green C. S. (2014). Video Games: Play That Can Do Serious Good”, American Journal of Play, 7(1), 50–72.
Elgin, C. (2002). Art in the Advancement of Understanding. American Philosophical Quarterly 39(1), 1–12.
Elgin, C. (2009). Is Understanding Factive? In Pritchard, D., Miller, A. & Hadock, A. (Eds.), Epistemic Value (pp.322–330) Oxford University Press.
Elgin, C. (2014). Fiction as Thought Experiment. Perspectives on Science, 22(2), 221–241.
Elgin, C. (2017). True Enough. Cambridge: The MIT Press
Freeland, C. A. (1997). Art and Moral Knowledge. Philosophical Topics, 25(1), 11–36.
Friend, S. (2006). Narrating the Truth (More or Less). In Lopes & Kieran: 35–50.
Friend, S. (2014). Believing in Stories. In Currie, G., Kieran, M., Meskin, A. & Robson, J. (Eds.), Aesthetics and the Sciences of Mind (pp. 227-248), Oxford University Press.
Gaut, B. (2003). Art and Knowledge. In Levinson, J. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics (pp.437–448), Oxford University Press.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gibson J. (2008). Cognitivism and the Arts. Philosophy Compass, 3(4), 573–589.
Goodman, N. & Elgin, C. (1988). Reconceptions in Philosophy and other arts and sciences. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Goodman, N. (1978). Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Goodman, N. (1983). Routes of Reference. Critical Inquiry, 8(1), 121–132.
Huizinga, J. (1998). Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. London: Taylor & Francis.
John, E. (1998). Reading Fiction and Conceptual Knowledge: Philosophical Thought in Literary Context. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56(4), 331–348.
John, E. (2001). Art and Knowledge. In Gaut, B. & Lopes, D. (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics, (pp. 329–340), Routledge.
Juul, J. (2005). Half Real. Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Kivy, P. (1997). Philosophies of Arts: An Essay in Differences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koster, R. (2004). A Theory of Fun for Game Design. Scottsdale: Paraglyph Press.
Kvanvig, J. L. (2003). The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lamarque, P. & Olsen, S. H. (1994). Truth, Fiction, and Literature. A Philosophical Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lopes, D. M. & Kieran, M. (Eds.) (2006). Knowing Art. Essays in Aesthetics and Epistemology. Dordrecht: Springer.
Mikkonen, J. (2015). On Studying the Cognitive Value of Literature. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 73(3), 273–282.
Nida-Rümelin, M. & O’Conaill, D. (2019). Qualia: The Knowledge Argument. In Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/qualia-knowledge/>.
Nguyen, T. (2017). Philosophy of Games. Philosophy Compass 12 (8), 1–18.
Novitz, D. (1987). Knowledge, Fiction & Imagination. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Novitz, D. (2004). Knowledge and Art. In Sintonen M., Wolenski J. & Niiniluoto I. (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemology (pp. 985–1012), Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nussbaum, M. (1990). Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Game-Based Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Putnam, H. (1978). Meaning and the Moral Sciences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Tavinor, G. (2009). The Art of Videogames. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How Computer Games Help Children Learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Squire, K. & Jenkins, H. (2003). Harnessing the Power of Games in Education. Insight, 3(1), 5–33
Schulzke, M. (2014). Simulating Philosophy: Interpreting Video Games as Executable Thought Experiments. Philosophy & Technology, 27: 251–265.
Stanley, J. & Williamson, T. (2001). Knowing How. The Journal of Philosophy, 98(8), 411–444.
Stock, K. (2017) Fiction, Testimony, Belief and History. In Sullivan-Bisset, E., Bradley, H. & Noordhof, P. (Eds.) Art and Belief (pp.19-41), Oxford University Press.
Stokes, D. (2006). Art and Modal Knowledge, in Kieran & Lopes: 67–81.
Stoljar, D. (2016). The Semantics of ‘What it’s like’ and the Nature of Consciousness. Mind, 125(500), 1161–1198.
Stolnitz, J. (1992). On the Cognitive Triviality of Art. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 32(3), 191–200.
Stroud, S. R. (2008). Simulation, Subjective Knowledge, and the Cognitive Value of Literary Narrative Introduction. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 42(3): 19–41.
Walton, K. (1990). Mimesis as Make-Believe. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Walsh, D. (1969). Literature and Knowledge. Middletown Conn: Wesleyan University Press.
Young, J. O. (2001). Art and Knowledge. London: Routledge.
Zagzebski, L. T. (2001). Recovering Understanding. In Steup, M. (Ed.), Knowledge, Truth and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility and Virtue (pp.236–251), Oxford University Press.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright in their articles and grant the Journal of the Philosophy of Games (JPG) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the following licence: Creative Commons Licence : CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. The licence allows others to share the work for non-commercial purposes with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal, but does not allow others to create derivative works based on the work without the author’s permission.
- Authors are allowed to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), provided that such distribution includes an acknowledgement of the article’s initial publication in JPG.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). Authors who distribute their work after its acceptance by JPG but prior to its publication agree to indicate on the manuscript that it will be published in JPG. Authors agree that they will not publish their work in any other journals, anthologies, or monographs before the date on which their work is published by JPG.
- Authors grant JPG a royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, worldwide license to create derivative works based on their articles and to publish their articles or any part of their articles in compilations and anthologies.
In special cases, it may be possible for the author to negotiate an open licence other than the CC BY-NC-ND.