Two Cheers for Physical Literacy: Reconsidering the Whiteheadian Account Through Radical Embodied Cognitive Science

Physical literacy has become influential across education, sport, health, and recreation. Yet the field contains multiple definitions and distinct traditions rather than a single agreed position. One especially influential strand is the Whiteheadian account, the philosophically oriented tradition associated with the British philosopher and physical educationalist Margaret Whitehead and extended through allied writers and institutional work. Whitehead did not invent the term physical literacy, which has a longer history, but she provided its most influential contemporary philosophical reconstruction and helped shape its current international meaning. The Whiteheadian account has been important because it rejects narrow mind–body separation and offers a holistic, lifespan-oriented account of movement, meaning, and human flourishing. The argument advanced here is that the Whiteheadian account is non-dualist in declaration but not always in operation. Its explicit commitment to monism and lived embodiment is not always matched by its practical grammar, in which bodily competence, bodily participation, and visible movement often carry more pedagogical and evaluative weight than minded engagement as a process of learning. Radical embodied cognitive science, especially radical enactivism, offers additional conceptual resources for developing a more explicitly relational account of learning and physical literacy because it begins with situated organism–environment engagement rather than with the later integration of bodily and mental domains. The article concludes by proposing a more relational, process-oriented, and pedagogically robust understanding of physical literacy.