Drawing on research from conversation analysis and developmental psychology, we point to the existence of “supporters” of morally responsible agency in everyday interaction: causes of our behavior that we are often unaware of, but that would make good-enough reasons for our actions, were we made aware of them.

Lake et al. point out that grounding learning in general principles of embodied perception and social cognition is the next step in advancing artificial intelligent machines. We suggest it is necessary to go further and consider lifelong learning, which includes developmental learning, focused on embodiment as applied in developmental robotics and neurorobotics, and crossmodal learning that facilitates integrating multiple senses.

Yarkoni has argued that psychology is facing a generalizability crisis, but the real cost of this crisis is obscured by a focus on topics from psychology's most academic subfields. Psychology is also filled with applied subfields, and it is within those subfields – especially clinical science – where the cost of a generalizability crisis will be most severe.

Food insecurity relates to fat storage, but cannot explain fat storage in excess of levels optimal for buffering – that is, obesity. However, factors related to food unpredictability in the past, including stress, disease, micronutrient content of food, and physical activity, may cue physiological processes that change intake or fat deposition even in the absence of actual food unpredictability.

Today's major religions are moralizing religions that encourage material sacrifice for spiritual rewards. A key issue is whether moralizing religions gradually evolved over several millennia to enable cooperation among genetic strangers in the spiraling competition between increasingly large groups occupying Eurasia's middle latitudes, or whether they emerged only with the onset of the Axial Age, about 2,500 years ago, as societal wealth increased to allow privileging long-term goals over immediate needs.

That neonates imitate is an assertion that lacks supporting evidence. Orofacial stereotypies are critical to optimizing food rejection. Matching of tongue-protrusion is not imitation, but a manifestation of the infant's arousal by the modeler's exhibition of the same behavior. The support for the nativist assertion that newborn infants imitate is not compelling, and we should proceed on the assumption that they do not.

This comment introduces the interactionist perspective on reason that Dan Sperber and I developed. In this perspective, reason is a specific cognitive mechanism that evolved so that humans can exchange justifications and arguments with each other. The interactionist perspective significantly aligns with Doris's views in rejecting reflectivism and individualism. Indeed, I suggest that it offers different, and maybe stronger arguments to reject these views.

“Negative” emotions are never purely negative. They attract attention at the very least and often stay attractive enough to make rehearsing them an addictive activity. As the authors point out, they also counteract a relentless tendency for positive emotions to become boring. Analysis in terms of reward suggests why this tendency occurs and how symbiosis with negative emotions may arise, in art and in life.

First, I argue that there is no agreement within non-classical cognitive science as to whether one should eliminate representations, hence, it is not clear that Brette's appeal to it is going to solve the problems with coding. Second, I argue that Brette's criticism of predictive coding as being intellectualistic is not justified, as predictive coding is compatible with embodied cognition.

We feel exhausted after working mentally hard even while just sitting on a chair, suggesting the concept of cognitive vigor. Do movement vigor and cognitive vigor share control mechanisms? Functions of the basal ganglia-cortical circuits, which are regulated by the midbrain dopaminergic system, appear to underlie both movement vigor and cognitive vigor.

We suggest that the accounts offered by the target articles could be strengthened by acknowledging the role of group selection and cultural niche construction in shaping the evolutionary trajectory of human music. We argue that group level traits and highly variable cultural niches can explain the diversity of human song, but the target articles' accounts are insufficient to explain such diversity.

Although compelling and insightful, the proposal by Uchiyama et al. largely neglects within-person change over time, arguably the central topic of interest within their framework. Longitudinal behavioural genetics modelling suggests that the heritability of trajectories is low, in contrast to high and increasing cross-sectional heritability across development. Better understanding of the mechanisms of trajectories remains a crucial outstanding challenge.

In their paper, Kalisch et al. make an important attempt to create a unifying theoretical framework for the neuroscientific study of general resilience mechanisms. We suggest that such attempts can benefit tremendously by incorporating the recently emerging network approaches that enable the characterization of complex brain network architecture and dynamics, in both health and disease.

The challenges raised in this article are not with information theory per se, but the assumptions surrounding it. Neuroscience isn't sufficiently critical about the appropriate ‘receiver’ or ‘channel’, focuses on decoding ‘parts’, and often relies on a flawed ‘veridicality’ assumption. If these problematic assumptions were questioned, information theory could be better directed to help us understand how the brain works.

Gilead et al.'s approach to human cognition places abstraction and prediction at the heart of “mental travel” under a “representational diversity” perspective that embraces foundational concepts in cognitive science. But, it gives insufficient credit to the possibility that the process of abstraction produces a gradient, and underestimates the importance of a highly influential domain in predictive cognition: language, and related, the emergence of experientially based structure through time.

What promised to be a refreshing addition to cumulative cultural evolution, by moving the focus from cultural transmission to technological innovation, falls flat through a lack of thoroughness, explanatory power, and data. A comprehensive theory of cumulative cultural change must carefully integrate all existing evidence in a cohesive multi-level account. We argue that the manuscript fails to do so convincingly.

Like Branigan & Pickering (B&P), we agree that processing evidence is important for linguistic theorization; however, without much evidence of priming of hierarchical argument structure independent of linear ordering, the nature of “structure” in structural priming remains unclear. Consequently, it is an empirical question whether structural priming and acceptability judgments tap into cognitive processes of a similar nature.

Bruineberg and colleagues argue that a realist interpretation of Markov blankets inadvertently relies upon unfounded assumptions. However, insofar as their diagnosis is accurate, their prescribed instrumentalism may ultimately prove insufficient as a complete remedy. Drawing upon a process-based perspective on living systems, we suggest a potential way to avoid some of the assumptions behind problems described by Bruineberg and colleagues.

Tomasello's characterization of obligation as demanding and coercive is not an implication of the centrality of collaborative commitment. Not only is this characterization contentious, it appears to be falsified in some cases of personal conviction. The theory would be strengthened if the nature of obligation's force and collaborative commitment were directly linked, possibly through Tomasello's notions of identity and identification.

Cushman argues that the function of rationalization is to attribute mental representations to ourselves, thereby making these representations available for future planning. I argue that such attribution is often not necessary and sometimes maladaptive. I suggest a different explanation of rationalization: making representations available to other agents, to facilitate cooperation, transmission, and the ratchet effect that underlies cumulative cultural evolution.