4 ms·

To get a little meta for a second, do we have a universally accepted, value-neutral, standard idea of exactly what we mean when we say cognition? Individual tes

To get a little meta for a second, do we have a universally accepted, value-neutral, standard idea of exactly what we mean when we say cognition? Individual tests might set different parameters and pay attention to different mechanics. Or do they? To put my question a different way: how confident are we in our current map of the system? I'm asking as a legitimately curious layperson. Perhaps this comment is naive, and if so, I'm admitting to my naivete in advance.

hprotagonist 9y ago
>do we have a universally accepted, standard idea of exactly what we mean when we say cognition? no. (sensory neuroscience guy here)
notduncansmith 9y ago
It's awfully tangled up with determinism and incompatibilism, neither of which are universally accepted. This makes it difficult to create a definition that is both meaningful and not controversial.
Banthum 9y ago
No, there is no single universal neutral standard of cognition. Memory tasks are different from mental rotation tasks, which are different from emotion-reading tasks, etc. But, it turns out that performance at a huge variety of sub-tasks is highly correlated. E.g. reaction time (catch a falling ruler as fast as you can) correlates with ability to solve math problems, which correlates with ability to control impulses. This is why IQ, as a general measure that covers a wide variety of tasks, is so useful. (Of course, that's not to say IQ covers everything about cognition in some absolute way; it doesn't measure ability to balance on a beam, for example, AFAIK).
eternalban 9y ago
I think a definition of 'cognition' at the hardware level (wet matter brain) would depend on a conjectured model of 'consciousness' to distinguish it from the more clearly definable 'sensing'. A simple model of (higher) consciousness could be that it is simply the 'state of the brain'. Sensation would be an almost axiomatic as the 'pattern of state change for specific stimuli' whereas 'thought' is 'pattern of state change invariant of stimuli'. Cognition could then be defined as 'sensation that [evokes] thought'.

hprotagonist 9y ago

>do we have a universally accepted, standard idea of exactly what we mean when we say cognition? no. (sensory neuroscience guy here)

notduncansmith 9y ago

It's awfully tangled up with determinism and incompatibilism, neither of which are universally accepted. This makes it difficult to create a definition that is both meaningful and not controversial.

Banthum 9y ago

No, there is no single universal neutral standard of cognition. Memory tasks are different from mental rotation tasks, which are different from emotion-reading tasks, etc. But, it turns out that performance at a huge variety of sub-tasks is highly correlated. E.g. reaction time (catch a falling ruler as fast as you can) correlates with ability to solve math problems, which correlates with ability to control impulses. This is why IQ, as a general measure that covers a wide variety of tasks, is so useful. (Of course, that's not to say IQ covers everything about cognition in some absolute way; it doesn't measure ability to balance on a beam, for example, AFAIK).

eternalban 9y ago

I think a definition of 'cognition' at the hardware level (wet matter brain) would depend on a conjectured model of 'consciousness' to distinguish it from the more clearly definable 'sensing'. A simple model of (higher) consciousness could be that it is simply the 'state of the brain'. Sensation would be an almost axiomatic as the 'pattern of state change for specific stimuli' whereas 'thought' is 'pattern of state change invariant of stimuli'. Cognition could then be defined as 'sensation that [evokes] thought'.