This article argues for the conclusion that anti-representationalism in the cognitive
sciences is not a well-founded theory of cognition. This conclusion is supported by the observation
that the link between the sceptical demonstrations and the anti-representational conclusion is too
weak for the demonstrations to justify anti-representationalism in general. Rather than denying the
need for internal representation, this article aim to establish that representational explanation -
reconstructed within a dynamical agent-environment characterization - serves a necessary epistemic
and ontological aim: It enables us to demarcate activities that presuppose intentionality and
behavioral autonomy from activities that are merely reactive and situation-determined.