|From:||Gary Berg-Cross <gbergcross@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Tue, 15 Apr 2014 15:32:51 -0400|
We may largely agree including the idea that some of this old style talking about things. But I think we
do have a difference of opinion on this:
"in essence, I do not believe that you can “study cognition without tying phenomena ... to the working of brains”.
I think that we do study such phenomena and make useful models that are not or may not yet be tied to "brains."
To be sure there is an area called cognitive neuroscience that is increasingly important but the early studies of sensory, store, short and long term memory were all done with minimal attempts at neuralizing the explanations.
They are pretty empirical and have quantitative formulations going back to the Magic #7 + or -2 that preceded any comparable neural model.
Areas like vision are heavily tied to brain structures and activity, but other cognitive models going back to Piaget are less so.
Gary Berg-Cross, Ph.D.
NSF INTEROP Project
SOCoP Executive Secretary
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Barkmeyer, Edward J <edward.barkmeyer@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Objectivist Context vs. Cognitive Science, Barkmeyer, Edward J|
|Next by Date:||[ontolog-forum] Sowa defeats McCullough !, Richard H. McCullough|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Objectivist Context vs. Cognitive Science, Barkmeyer, Edward J|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [ontolog-forum] Objectivist Context vs. Cognitive Science, Barkmeyer, Edward J|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|