tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9192597712746432631.post491120025844239700..comments2024-03-09T09:06:35.288+00:00Comments on Notes from Two Scientific Psychologists: 'Embodied Cognition', by Lawrence ShapiroAndrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16732977871048876430noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9192597712746432631.post-5019192102528044492014-02-12T13:32:54.720+00:002014-02-12T13:32:54.720+00:00@Sabrina Golonka: Going back to the old S-R, S-O-R...@Sabrina Golonka: Going back to the old S-R, S-O-R debate, are we?liszt85https://www.blogger.com/profile/06915836799539783815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9192597712746432631.post-61360726565821419782013-07-15T13:45:09.145+01:002013-07-15T13:45:09.145+01:00Agreed. I wrote a post about this awhile back (htt...Agreed. I wrote a post about this awhile back (http://psychsciencenotes.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/is-it-time-to-abandon-cognitive-non.html). Cognition is certainly not a natural phenomenon and no one has provided a principled way to distinguish the cognitive from the non-cognitive. This is why I advocate being up front about wanting to study and explain behaviour, not cognition. Sabrina Golonkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10484205507927422316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9192597712746432631.post-25590646197967112632013-07-15T03:34:31.427+01:002013-07-15T03:34:31.427+01:00It is scientifically incorrect to ask: "...ho...It is scientifically incorrect to ask: "...how cognition is actually implemented in us." without providing the evidential facts that cognition is existent as the Natural phenomenon. So far all scientists ascribing the features of cognition trough the observed acts of behavior, without pointing to the distinguishing properties of that phenomenon. So we could conclude that cognition did not exist, and all discussions about it essentually empty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9192597712746432631.post-8017675029428302032012-07-28T18:29:13.101+01:002012-07-28T18:29:13.101+01:00Great review!
When people get into arguments lik...Great review! <br /><br />When people get into arguments like: <br /><br /><i>"Does Otto really remember things using his notebook the way Inga does with her brain?"</i><br /><br />It seems like an odd slippage between description and explanation. The question should be "Do both count as instances of remembering?" If so, then "What is happening in those actual situations?" If you get a decent handle on "remember" as a descriptive term, then you can be open to multiple explanations. <i>Of course</i> the process involving the paper works differently than the process without the piece of paper... but you should be able to agree (or disagree) that both are instances of remembering long before you start investigating the processes. <br /><br />As you say, the more interesting question is what actual people actually do when remembering. In that context, one can investigate role of a list.Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.com