[ES] El objetivo principal de este trabajo es la puesta en com?n de diversos planteamientos te?ricos para la formulaci?n de una alternativa anti-representacionalista al estudio cognitivo cl?sico de la triada percepci?n-cognici?n-acci?n. A este respecto, destaco especialmente las contribuciones del conductismo radical a dicha empresa. Partiendo de un enfoque anti-factualista y anti-descriptivista, analizo diversas formas de entender lo cognitivo en funci?n de dos distinciones clave: la distinci?n personal/subpersonal (niveles de explicaci?n) y la distinci?n normativo/nomol?gico (tipos de discurso explicativo). La discusi?n est? estructurada en torno a tres estrategias convergentes: la uni?n percepci?n-acci?n, la uni?n cognici?n-acci?n y la uni?n percepci?n-cognici?n. Las principales conclusiones del trabajo son las siguientes: a) la alianza entre psicolog?a ecol?gica y conductismo radical constituye un marco nomol?gico apropiado para el estudio de la interacci?n agente-entorno; b) pese a la irreductibilidad del vocabulario mental que empleamos en la justificaci?n racional del comportamiento, existen ciertos hechos - tradicionalmente considerados cognitivos- que s? son explicables en t?rminos conductuales (i.e., los fen?menos encubiertos y la monitorizaci?n verbal y no verbal del comportamiento); c) la experiencia es permeable al ejercicio de nuestras facultades racionales; y d) la racionalidad est? en cierto sentido relacionada con los procesos de monitorizaci?n verbal y no verbal de la conducta.

[EN] The main purpose of this essay is to gather diverse theoretical approaches to develop an anti-representationalist alternative to the classical cognitive approach to the study of the perception-cognition-action triad. In this respect, the contributions of radical behaviorism to this endeavor are specially highlighted. Drawing from an anti-factualist and antidescriptivist approach, several ways to conceptualize the cognitive are analyzed according to two fundamental distinctions: the personal/subpersonal distinction (levels of explanation) and the normative/nomological distinction (types of explanation). The discussion is structured around three convergent strategies: the union of perception and action, the union of cognition and action and the union of perception and cognition. The main findings are the following: a) the alliance between ecological psychology and radical behaviorism offers an appropriate nomological framework for the study of the agent-environment interaction; b) despite the irreducibility of the mental vocabulary that we employ for the rational justification of behavior, there are certain facts -traditionally considered as cognitive- that allow for an explanation in behavioral terms (i.e., covert phenomena and the verbal and non-verbal monitoring of behavior); c) experience is pervious to the exercise of our rational faculties; and d) rationality is someway related to the verbal and non-verbal monitoring processes of behavior.

Trabajo de Fin de M?ster en Investigaci?n en L?gica y Filosof?a de la Ciencia, curso 2015-2016.