“Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death…”

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by coberst, Jul 6, 2008.

  1. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death…”

    “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.”--Psalm 23:4

    ‘Yea, though I walk trough the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for my Basic-Level Categorizations and Kinesthetic Imager Schemas form reality for Me.’--coberst

    Experience is structured in a fundamental way before any concepts, invigorated by sense data, are constructed. Existing preconceptual structures affect newly developing structures of what we experience.

    We have preconceptual structures that await any new experience and perhaps the most fundamental of these is the container schema.
    This container schema has a boundary that distinguishes the container’s interior from the exterior.

    With a little thought we can find dozens of instances during the day when we distinguish in-out activities. We emerge out of a deep sleep and into the morning sunlight; we get out of bed and go to the kitchen to take the bread from the bread box and place the slices into the toaster.

    The CONTAINER SCHEMA:

    We conceptualize an enormous number of activities in CONTAINER terms. The container schema (a mental codification of experience that includes a particular organized way of perceiving cognitively) is a spatial-relations concept that all advanced neural creatures impose upon acts of perception and conception.

    There is a spatial logic inherent in the container schema; it is axiomatic that given two containers, A and B, and an object, X, if A is in B and X is in A, then X is in B. The container schema like all image schemas can be imposed on what we hear, on what we see, and on our motor movements; such schemas are cross-modal.

    The container schema is a fundamental spatial-relations concept that allows us to draw important inferences. This natural container format is the source for our logical inferences that are so obvious to us when we view Venn diagrams. If container A is in container B and B is in container C, then A is in C.

    A container schema is a gestalt (a functional unit) figure with an interior, an exterior, and a boundary—the parts make sense only as part of the whole. Container schemas are cross-modal—“we can impose a conceptual container schema on a visual scene…on something we hear, as when we conceptually separate out one part of a piece of music from another…This structure is topological in the sense that the boundary can be made larger, smaller, or distorted and still remain the boundary of a container schema…Image schemas have a special cognitive function: They are both perceptual and conceptual in nature. As such, they provide a bridge between language and reasoning on the one hand and vision on the other.”

    The PART-WHOLE Schema:

    We conceptualize our self as a whole with parts. Families are conceptualized as a whole with parts. “The general concept of structure itself is a metaphorical projection of the CONFIGURATION aspect of PART-WHOLE STRUCTURE. When we understand two things as being isomorphic, we mean that their parts stand in the same configuration to the whole.”

    Basic Logic: If the WHOLE exists then the PARTS exist. The PARTS can exist while the WHOLE may not exist. “We have evolved so that our basic-level perception can distinguish the fundamental PART-WHOLE structure that we need in order to function in our physical environment.”

    There are a few more but this gives you an idea of how SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) claims that we structure our reality.

    Quotes from “Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind” by George Lakoff
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    I think emotion plays a large part in establishing context which in are in turn activated via stimulous.

    I'm pretty sure context is the key organizing principle of thought, sort of 'lubricating the flow' between concepts as potentially activated by the process of thought. In thinking of holographic storage, context is the particular angle from which a concept (which yields different information depending upon how you look at it) is 'activated' in the current thought. I'm pretty sure emotion sort of sets a 'mode' for context. I think of it as sort of a 'tensile force' straining or strengthening the conceptual relationships in mind at the moment in question.

    I think these considerations alter the framework under consideration in the thread, assuming of course they're reasonable representations of mental mechanics.

    It's not a part-whole thing so much as a 'different depending on how you look at it thing', so the object in question 'part-whole' isn't really that, but is both and in between at the same time if you don't evaluate the concept (when you aren't relating to it or it 'isn't active' at the time of the thought in question) depending of course upon what comprises (the patterns formed through honed stimulous) it in the pertinant instance of mind.
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2008
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. coberst Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    949
    In the Psalm we trust God to help us through life which is strewn with evil, i.e. it is strewn with things that promote death. I then say that we are born with such things as preconceptual structures which aid us in comprehending the evils in our path as we travel through life.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    Oh, you're retarded. I see.
     
  8. EndLightEnd This too shall pass. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,301
  9. Simon Anders Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,535
    LOL. Though actually coberst is a bricoleur where one should not be. A bricoleur chooses from amongst a limited set of options. The classic herbalist in the forest can only choose from, perhaps, 25 plants in the middle of winter, to treat a certain illness that has cropped up. So he makes the best of it and chooses. Here we have someone with a limited set of quotes and paraphrases with which to respond to comments in his threads.

    Oh, dear. Wes Morris raised this issue and made this point.


    A quick shuffling of note cards to find an idea or quote or paraphrase that might kinda fit as a response.

    He plunks donw the index card and is surprised to learn that people do not think he responded.

    Be prepared for a post that says

    'I am a retired engineer who......life long learning.....critical thinking.........'

    perhaps with a list describing what critical thinking is.

    A list he needs to read himself, since he confuses having the list with understanding it.
     
  10. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    LIKE I SAID....

    Lol.

    It's okay, everyone thinks as they do for good reason. Sometimes though that good reason is as mentioned.

    Lol. I'm oldish and engineeringish too damnit, and often retarded.

    I enjoyed your analysis though simon.
     
  11. Simon Anders Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,535
    If you are posting on dozens of forums quoting the same authors you have been quoting for years AND have a very hard time responding to what people write rather than simply seeing what they write as opportunities to toss in a near random paraphrase AND repeatedly post lists about critical thinking rather than at least taking a stab at doing some yourself I will hold you oldishness and engineeringness against you.

    Otherwise I see these qualities as harmless
    to others at least.
     
  12. wesmorris Nerd Overlord - we(s):1 of N Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,844
    My retardation comes in a variety of forms, jokes that seem appropriate to me but aren't well taken (occassionally), yelling at my kids when I should be more patient, putting stuff where I can't find it or not being able to find something that's right in freakin front of me, etc.

    I super-rarely quote anyone but myself unless I'm responding directly to a post. So myah - I think I'm mostly harmless except to the psyche of my kids, which they'll probably get over cuz of the hugs, kisses and praise when I'm not yelling. Hehe.

    Now where did I put that singularity generator again? *sigh*
     
  13. Simon Anders Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,535
    I don't think yelling is damaging per se. I think it's when it comes off threatening or coming from a position of real hatred - rather than the more mundane parental frustration. In fact the fact that you accept the strength of your own emotions could help them accept their own. The more certain emotions get considered not loving, the work the psyche has to do and the more that ends up smouldering underneath not liking anyone.

    So I think that one depends.

    For the bad jokes you should burn in hell....

    nah.
     

Share This Page