It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Cognitive Science and Ontology

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 01:34 PM
Forgive me for the dilettantism.

I have a few questions about the nature of cognitive sciences, and it's future direction.

Where is this science going? What is the relationship between it's representational view of cognition, and ontology?

The only connection I can make out is that both fields are thoroughly mechanistic. Cognitive science aims to build scientific representational structures for all psychological phenomena, while ontology takes psychological phenomena to be 'things in themselves'.

Can the two approaches be bridged? Or do they move in opposite directions?

The main thing to me is that both fields look at the world in terms of mechanics. Cognitive psychology takes the phenomena of consciousness to be organizational structures, probably motivated by 'evolution', hence the field of evolutionary psychology. Ontology can be understood in the same terms, but as a 'mirror' of the evolutionary development of cognitive structures in some self subsistent 'mental' dimension.

Physics is going in the direction of 'smaller' and smaller things. Now, I have absolutely no understanding of how this all works. I can only look from without and wonder what physicists might be looking for, and where physics will probably end up.

Will physics meet up with ontology? Will cognitive science meet up with ontology? Is there a metaphysical substructure which conditions all these various fields of research?
edit on 16-10-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by dontreally

Reductionism can only go so far before it becomes integrationism, that is, we must view reality as broken down from a whole as opposed to parts aggregated. Metaphysics already acknowledges this but until we remove the "meta", via some mad science experiment there will be no bridge, and that's a matter of politics. Rogue physicists are the only chance.

I think an undeniable experiment would be soul-catching or embodied cognition, that would prove that consciousness is the only singular whole, and it doesn't care if it's expressed in evolved goo or invented goo (as in a neuromimetic processor, one that is 3D and wet, with biomorphed cells and fluids, the means of transferring a soul is a whole other branch that could shed light - scalar interferometry)

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 02:45 PM
Science is but the shadow of metaphysics. Factoids about larger truths. Will the mind ever be able to comprehend and deconstruct the mind? Or infinity for that matter? Solve paradox?

The Alchemist, I think, had it about right: The strange-brew of science and metaphysics. Science seems to be pushing ever closer to weird-science. No Kelly LeBrock for us, though, I'm guessing.


log in