• If the notebook is part of Otto’s self then what else can be included in this extended self? (page 13).—EA

• If external cognition means part of our mind exists outside of our bodies (e.g., p. 11), does that mean your mind can live forever in the form of writing, art, etc?—WF

• Einstein said, “ Never memorize what you can look up in books.” Should we rely on our brains to reference things or should we keep putting information into books? (13-17)—AW

• Mostly §4, but specifically page 16. Are Inga’s and Otto’s ways of accessing memories the same?—SM

• Is the rearranging of tiles on a Scrabble tray completely done by the use of thought or can there be action as well? (Page 10)—JC

• Does the idea of a cognitive system go far enough in separating the mind from the brain in the conclusion of the Otto and Ingra analogy (pg. 15-17)?—PW

• Can beliefs be constituted by features of the environment? p. 12—CS

• How important is language when determining mental capabilities and personhood? Pg.18—BF

• Is it easy to embrace and believe active externalsim? p.9-10—DM

• Assume Clark and Chalmers’s theory is applicable in explaining our minds. As they mention “it is entirely possible that one partner’s beliefs will play the same sort of role for the other as the notebook plays for Otto” in page 17, do you think it is possible to “freeze and store” a mind, and further, “build” a mind? If not, do you believe that continuity is a fundamental property of a mind?—PY

P.S. It’s interesting to realize that the author of this paper is a believer of Occam’s razor (pg.14 “In an explanation, simplicity is power”).