where is cognitive science going?

[rh001YT]

Your silliness can be excused by your youth. The physical world is not at all well mapped out. The so-called basic forces are not at all understood. Gravity is a complete mystery, as is time. "Truth" is human - there is no "truth" outside of humanity. Can study of any matter proceed except from a value judgement ? Why does a certain thought "pop" into mind? Would you think at all, if you had no anxieties? A young person might want to consider these kinds of things first.

[gnosisoneness]

When I stated that our personal experience is as real as matter I did not mean to infer our personal experiences were always relevant to our material or outer experience but only that we do actually experience our inner experiences. When the mental event is imaginary, our consciousness experienced something despite the fact that it did not come thru our outer senses. The difference between mind and matter is one of perception not unlike sound and sight being difference experiences.

[gnosisoneness]

The emergence theory of mind ultimately will fail. Mind and matter are both objects of consciousness as mind is consciousness conscious of itself. Mind and matter are concepts of the mind and are different ways of perceiving different aspects of our world. We can correlate our outer experience with our inner experience but our outer experience will never describe our actual inner experience. Science needs to recognize that our personal experience is as real as matter. i

[Divigen]

Where is cognitive science?

This pretenious teenager will tell you.

[Nades129]

Could be the final frontier or something else that will come up that will be more magnificent...

[Chroposnos]

over 9000!!

[Valetudo21]

Neural networks are far too simple to work alone. They are not the end-all solution to the machine intelligence problem. I am involved in AI research for my company and the model we are currently working on far surpasses existing learning models using neural networks. Neural networks are at the core of this model, however there are many other design techniques required to simulate memory and rational thought or behaviour.

[asuraizen]

hmmm

I'm planning on a career in AI research. Still a long way to go but yeah the concept is a challenge when it is difficult to make a computer architecture which is able to imitate human behavior.

But my thoughts would say that the final frontier would still be space, 78 billion light years (which is the farthest the hubble has seen). Not really something that can be thought possible to traverse compared to discovering the secrets of the brain.

[witchboner]

why haven't you 'enlightened' the neuro community with your insight then? what's the use of talking about it when we could be giving a larger awareness to the scientific community. I personally think that we are too focused on an individual processes that 'consitute' consciousness without looking at the larger context with which it is working in.

I suggest reading into Joseph Margolis's intuitions into culture, social sciences, and neuro work.

[Valetudo21]

Well not only did I sign an NDA but the details and concept are commercial trade secrets.

[CJDownz]

Is it worth studying cognitive science in University? Could I land a good job with it? I am going into my first year and I'm not sure if I should study cogsci which is what interests me the most, or software design which seems to be in higher demand.

[balance311]

metacognition is a strange beast, a paradox at least, because of its rather peculiar implications. generally we use symbols to conceptualize this mind-thing as an entity that holds or contains thoughts, but our subjective experience ultimately leads us to phenomenology, after which the concept of mind seems to disappear. we can conceptualize the mind in the same manner in which we can conceptualize the cosmos; we can think ABOUT it but never actually experience it in its totality.

[thewhitekimby]

I'm not sure I would say that neural networks are so new relative to cognitivism. Frank Rosenblatt published the Principles of Neurodynamics: Perceptrons and the Theory of Brain Mechanisms back in 1962, and you can find earlier references. It's just that Marvin Minsky (Perceptrons, 1969) and others were able to prevent neural networks from being well funded by focusing on problems like XOR.

[redliterocket4]

yeah they aren't new, they just weren't taken as seriously as they are now.

[thewhitekimby]

Do you think that introspection is the best way to study the mind? It seems that what we're conscious of is only the tip of the iceberg. I don't want to use the metaphor of consciousness being the endproduct of brain processing, but if you want to learn how a television works, you don't just stare at the screen. You open it up.

[redliterocket4]

Ah, the TV is an interesting metaphor... the TV itself does not create the video screen... so opening it up would explain nothing. The TV is a receiver, it gets its picture from somewhere else, and as far as we know the brain could work the same way.

[redliterocket4]

And introspection can be more powerful than I think you give it credit for. There are Buddhist meditative techniques that explore the nature of the mind far deeper than just the conscious surface.

[mongzhu]

Buddhist meditative techniques are more important in respect to train your mind and use the placticity of the brain to change metabolic processes within it.

[redliterocket4]

The final frontier is the mind, "inside space" so to speak. But when I heard myself say that truth was more likely going to be found by "increasing the depth of understanding of ourselves through introspection," I thought I was leaving out something important, namely intersubjectivity. I'll comment on that in my next video on enactive cognition.

[existentialistboy]

you really cover cognitive philosphy welll