Representational theory of mind still popular? The representational theory of mind is the dominant approach. Simplifying somewhat, it says that beliefs, desires, and intentions are “represented” as sentences in a special language (“mentalese”). Mentalese, in turn, is “implemented” as physical things (structures, states, or processes) in the brain.” I agree with you on the representational theory of mind being wrong, but not the statements on its current importance. Cognitive science was a bit of a failure in my eyes - and the failure is partly due to the importance of the representational theory of mind in tying things together. These days, I would say the majority of people who study the mind (psychologists and neuroscientists) don’t believe in the representational theory of mind (in the Language of Thought version of mentalese that you mention) and it doesn’t feature in their work. There are lots of people who call themselves cognitive psychologists and cognitive neuroscientists, but I don’t think they would ascribe to cognitivism (as formulated here) and aren’t much interested in what philosophers have to say about meaning, though I couldn’t really judge what most philosophers of mind believe these days. And I also have doubts on it is what most educated members of the public think - those that read Pinker’s “How the mind works” uncritically might assume it to be true. But my guess is that the popularity of this particular idea peaked about 20 years ago (e.g. Pinker’s book was published in 97). But there are a lot of other popular science books since then on how the mind works which do not assume such a theory, and are more influenced by empirical findings than philosophical theories. It might be fair to say that many believe in a weaker view that disregards cognitivism but takes the stance that the mind/brain processes representations, and those representations have “meaning” and those meanings are somehow “in the head”, so I would be interested to see what you think the negative consequences of that are.