Talk:Santiago theory of cognition

So, why this theory is called "Santiago"? because of the residence of the authors? is this name used in other contexts such as publications? Not clear enough in this article

The following sentence needs to be clarified: “Cognition emerges as a consequence of continuous interaction between the system and its environment”. This sentence implies a sequential relationship in which cognition only arises after repeated interaction between the system and its environment. So there would be a period in which the organism was living but did not possess cognition. This is contrary to Maturana and Varela’s view that living systems are cognitive systems. Rather the sentence should state that cognition is the autopoietic process in which an organism maintains itself and adapts within its environment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.7.67.23 (talk) 13:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

This is just a case of a basically incorrect apostrophe. It should be 'The Santiago Theory of Cognition' because named after a place, not belonging to a person.

Requested move 19 January 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: paged moved (non-admin closure)   CAPTAIN MEDUSA   talk  06:58, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Santiago's theory of cognition → Santiago theory of cognition – The current article title is not the name given to the theory, nor is it even grammatically correct. As others posted above, ''This is just a case of a basically incorrect apostrophe. It should be 'The Santiago Theory of Cognition' because named after a place, not belonging to a person.'' nagualdesign 17:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree. The apostrophe make it sound like someone with Santiago was name or surname postulated it. Sietecolores (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Nominator is right. Support. 216.8.143.101 (talk) 13:23, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per nom and others above. Dicklyon (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. This is just a misnomer. And, no, it shouldn't be "The Santiago Theory of Cognition", per WP:THE and MOS:DOCTCAPS, but I see that the nominator didn't actually put it in that form in the RM itself. Just want to forestall anyone trying to "vote" for that formatting.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.