Monday, May 02, 2022

Illusions of consequence

 


İllüzyonların Sonuçları

Illusions of consequence

 

Bu örneklerden bazıları anlamsız görünebilir. Birinin bir elbiseyi siyah ve mavi olarak görmesi ve diğerinin onu beyaz ve altın olarak görmesi neden önemli?

Some of these examples may seem frivolous. Why does it matter that one person sees a dress as black and blue and another sees it as white and gold?

 

Önemli çünkü bilim adamları, aynı temel süreçlerin, daha karmaşık algılarımızın ve düşüncelerimizin çoğunun altında yattığına inanıyorlar. O halde sinirbilim, kültürümüzdeki ve politikamızdaki inatçı kutuplaşmayı ve neden motive olmuş akıl yürütmeye bu kadar yatkın olduğumuzu açıklamaya yardımcı olabilir.

It matters because scientists believe the same basic processes underlie many of our more complicated perceptions and thoughts. Neuroscience, then, can help explain stubborn polarization in our culture and politics, and why we’re so prone to motivated reasoning.

 

Bazen, özellikle aldığımız bilgiler net olmadığında, görmek istediğimizi görürüz. Geçmişte araştırmacılar, küçük ödüllerin bile insanların nesneleri algılama şeklini değiştirebileceğini keşfettiler.

Sometimes, especially when the information we’re receiving is unclear, we see what we want to see. In the past, researchers have found that even slight rewards can change the way people perceive objects.

 

"Ve bu onları münakaşanın doğasına dair farklı bir anlayışa götürüyor."

Önyargıyı beyinden tamamen kaldıramazsınız. Balcetis, “Hepimizin farklı dünyalarda büyüdüğü gerçeğini değiştiremezsiniz” dedi. Ancak insanları diğer bakış açılarını dinlemeye ve kendi bakış açılarının doğruluğunu merak etmeye teşvik edebilirsiniz.

 “And it leads them to a different understanding of the nature of the altercation.”

You can’t completely remove bias from the brain. “You can’t change the fact that we’ve all grown up in different worlds,” Balcetis said. But you can encourage people to listen to other perspectives and be curious about the veracity of their own.

 

Konuştuğum sinirbilimciler, beynimizin gördüklerimizi nasıl işlediğinin altında yatan büyük ilkelerin aynı zamanda düşüncelerimizin çoğunun altında da yattığını söylediler. Martinez-Conde, illüzyonların “batıl inancın temeli, büyülü düşüncenin temeli” olduğunu söylüyor. “Birçok hatalı inancın temeli bu. Belirsizlikten çok rahatsızız. Belirsizlik öyle ya da böyle, bazen de gerçeğe uymayan bir şekilde çözülecek.”

The neuroscientists I spoke to said the big principles that underlie how our brains process what we see also underlie most of our thinking. Illusions are “the basis of superstition, the basis of magical thinking,” Martinez-Conde says. “It’s the basis for a lot of erroneous beliefs.  We’re very uncomfortable with uncertainty. The ambiguity is going to be resolved one way or another, and sometimes in a way that does not match reality.”

 

Siyaset bilimciler ve psikologlar, siyasi partizanların siyasi inançlarına bağlı olarak güncel olayların gerçeklerini nasıl farklı algıladıklarını uzun zamandır belgelemişlerdir. İllüzyonlar ve politik düşünce aynı beyin süreçlerini içermez, ancak beynin çalıştığı benzer kapsayıcı yolu takip ederler.

Bir bakıma, önyargıyı sosyal bir yanılsama bir illüzyon olarak düşünebilirsiniz.

Political scientists and psychologists have long documented how political partisans perceive the facts of current events differently depending on their political beliefs. The illusions and political thinking don’t involve the same brain processes, but they follow the similar overarching way the brain works.

In a way, you can think of bias as a social illusion.

 

Bu, tüm önyargı örneklerinin akılsız olduğu anlamına gelmez - birçoğu açıkça kötü niyetli bir niyetle sahnelenir, ancak aynı zamanda adaletsiz bir toplumda yılların deneyiminden veya sistemik ırkçılığın sonucu olarak da inşa edilebilirler.

This isn’t to say that all instances of prejudice are mindless —many are enacted with clear malignant intention, but they can also be built from years of experience in an unjust society or as the result of systemic racism.

 

 

Beynimiz, önceki deneyimlerimizi, duygularımızı ve belirsizlikten duyduğumuz rahatsızlığı karşılamak için gerçekliği bükmek için çok çalışır. Bu vizyonla olur. Ama aynı zamanda siyaset, pandemi veya iklim değişikliği gerçeği hakkında düşünmek gibi daha karmaşık süreçlerle de olur.

Our brains work hard to bend reality to meet our prior experiences, our emotions, and our discomfort with uncertainty. This happens with vision. But it also happens with more complicated processes, like thinking about politics, the pandemic, or the reality of climate change.

 

Önemli Belirsizlik, dallanıp budaklanmış veya çatallanmış öncelikler ve varsayımlarla birleştiğinde Anlaşmazlık verir. ... Bir görüntü, olay veya başka bir uyaran tam olarak net olmadığında, boşlukları önceliklerimiz veya varsayımlarımızla doldururuz. Ve farklı önceliklerimiz olduğu için, bu, söz konusu görüntü veya olay hakkında anlaşmazlığa yol açar.

Substantial Uncertainty combined with Ramified or Forked Priors and Assumptions yields Disagreement. ... When an image, event, or some other stimulus isn’t perfectly clear, we fill in the gaps with our priors, or presumptions. And because we have different priors, that leads to disagreement about the image or event in question.

 

İnsanların bunu okumasını ve gözlerimize inanamayacağımızı veya düşüncemize kanıtları dahil edemeyeceğimizi düşünmelerini istemiyorum. Doğrulanmış bilgi kaynaklarını araştırabiliriz. Uzmanlığa yönelebilir ve ayrıca onu ciddiyetle sorgulayabiliriz.

I don’t want people to read this and think we can’t believe our eyes, or we can’t incorporate evidence into our thinking. We can seek out verified sources of information. We can turn to expertise and also earnestly question it.

 

Deneyimlerimizin biraz yanlış olabileceğini bilerek, hayatımızı nasıl sürdüreceğiz?

How do we go about ourlives knowing our experiences might be a bit wrong?

 

Cevap veren yok. Ve bu, bireysel olarak çözmemiz pek mümkün olmayan bir problem. Bunun bizi, entelektüel olarak daha alçakgönüllü olmaya ve bize ait olmayan bakış açıları arama alışkanlığını geliştirmeye teşvik etmesini öneririm. Kusurlarımızı merak etmeliyiz, çünkü bu merak bizi gerçeğe daha da yaklaştırabilir. Alçakgönüllülüğü kutlayan ve “yanılmışım” demenin toplumsal maliyetini azaltan kültürler ve kurumlar inşa edebiliriz.

There’s no one answer. And it’s a problem we’re unlikely to solve individually. I’d suggest that it should nudge us to be more intellectually humble and to cultivate a habit of seeking outperspectives that are not our own.  We should be curious about our imperfections, as that curiosity may lead us closer to the truth. We can build cultures and institutions that celebrate humility and reduce the social cost for saying, “I was wrong.”

 

Bu kolay değil. Psikolojimiz bunu zorlaştırıyor. Balcetis geçen yıl bana “Dünyayı görme şeklimizin gerçekte olduğu gibi olduğu konusunda saf bir gerçekçiliğe sahibiz” dedi. Naif gerçekçilik, dünya algımızın gerçeği yansıttığı hissidir.

This isn’t easy.  Our psychology makes it hard.  “We have this naive realism that the way we see the world is the way that it really is,” Balcetis told me last year.  Naive realism is the feeling that our perception of the world reflects the truth.

 

8/21/2021 The neuroscience of optical illusions, explained – Vox

 

Tuesday, April 26, 2022

People assume what they see more of

 

 

Neyi daha çok görmüşsek gördüklerimizi o zannederiz

People assume what they see more of

We use surrounding color cues and assumptions about lighting to guess an object’s true color. Sometimes those guesses are wrong, and sometimes we make different assumptions from others. Neuroscientists have some intriguing new insights into why our perceptions can diverge from one another.

Bir nesnenin gerçek rengini tahmin etmek için çevreleyen renk ipuçlarını ve aydınlatmayla ilgili varsayımları kullanırız. Bazen bu tahminler yanlış çıkar, bazen de diğerlerinden farklı varsayımlarda bulunuruz. Nörobilimciler, algılarımızın neden birbirinden farklı olabileceğine dair bazı ilgi çekici yeni görüşlere sahipler.

 

Is it in bright daylight? Or under an indoor light bulb? By unconsciously filtering out the color of light we think is falling on an object, we come to a judgment about its color.

Parlak gün ışığında mı? Veya bir iç mekan ampulünün altında mı? Bir cismin üzerine düştüğünü düşündüğümüz ışığın rengini bilinçsizce filtreleyerek, rengi hakkında bir yargıya varırız.

 

Wallisch believes people who see this image differently are using different filtering schemes.Most interestingly, he suggests that life experience leads you to see the dress one way or the other.

Wallisch, bu görüntüyü farklı şekilde gören insanların farklı filtreleme şemaları kullandığına inanıyor. En ilginç olanı, yaşam deneyiminin elbiseyi şu ya da bu şekilde görmenize yol açtığını öne sürüyor.

 

It could be prior experience with the subject matter, or related to other aspects of people’s personality,” he says.

Konuyla ilgili önceden deneyim olabilir veya insanların kişiliğinin diğer yönleriyle ilgili olabilir” diyor.

 

— our brains fill in the ambiguity using whatever we’re most familiar with. “People assume what they see more of,” Wallisch says.  If we’re more familiar with bright, sunny light, we assume that’s the default lighting.

- Beynimiz, en aşina olduğumuz şeyi kullanarak belirsizliği doldurur. Wallisch, “İnsanlar daha çok gördüklerini varsayıyorlar” diyor. Parlak, güneşli ışığa daha aşinaysak, bunun varsayılan aydınlatma olduğunu varsayıyoruz.

 

But we have no way of knowing how our experiences guide our perception. “Your brain makes a lot of unconscious inferences, and it doesn’t tell you that it’s an inference,” he explains. “You see whatever you see. Your brain doesn’t tell you, ‘I took into account how much daylight I’ve seen in my life.’”

Ancak deneyimlerimizin algımıza nasıl rehberlik ettiğini bilmenin hiçbir yolu yok. “Beyniniz çok sayıda bilinçsiz çıkarım yapar ve size bunun bir çıkarım olduğunu söylemez” diye açıklıyor. "Ne görürsen onu görürsün. Beyniniz size 'Hayatımda ne kadar gün ışığı gördüğümü hesaba kattım' demiyor.”

8/21/2021 The neuroscience of optical illusions, explained – Vox 


Monday, April 18, 2022

 

SENSES NEURISH SELF


 

When we hold a hammer and use it, the hammer becomes part of our body.  We do not think explicitly  of holding the hammer.  We just direct it and hit the nail with it as if using a part of our body.  This is called embodiment.

 When we drive a car we feel as if the car is part of our body. We use the wheel and the break/gas pedal without explicitly noticing them.  We just drive the car.  The car becomes a part of our embodiment.

 Embodiment exists in many layers in fact.  For example, we do not explicitly feel our fingers and distinctive muscles in our hand when we hold something.  Our hand is part of our body, it is part of our embodiment.  We feel fingers and  hand muscles as part of hand, as the embodiment of hand.

At the core of this onion like layers lies the self.  Body is the embodiment of self.

 Returning back to the car as an embodiment,  we do not feel that we hold the driving wheel explicitly when we drive.  But in the case of an emergency, we are conditioned to hold the drivers wheel much strongly and squeeze our hands on it.  This stops the automatic processes and increases our attention to the urgent situation.

 The driving wheel is the interface between the car and the driver.  Increasing the importance of the interface increases the feeling of the body.  Interface nourishes the body.

 Returning back to the hand as an embodiment of self; hand is an interface between self and the environment.  We feel the hand and even all the body through our senses.  Senses are part of the interface mechanism between self and the body and environment.

 “Arousing the Senses” nourishes the self as Tommie Hahn’s book suggests.



Tuesday, March 29, 2022

TO SEE THE MOVEMENT

TO SEE THE MOVEMENT

HAREKETİ GÖRMEK

Fix your gaze on the black dot on the left side of this image. But wait! Finish reading this paragraph first. As you gaze at the left dot, try to answer this question: In what direction is the object on the right moving? Is it drifting diagonally, or is it moving up and down?

Remember, focus on the dot on the left.

Bakışınızı bu görüntünün sol tarafındaki siyah noktaya sabitleyin. Fakat bekle! Önce bu paragrafı okumayı bitirin. Sol noktaya bakarken şu soruyu yanıtlamaya çalışın: Sağdaki nesne hangi yönde hareket ediyor? Çapraz olarak mı sürükleniyor, yoksa yukarı ve aşağı mı hareket ediyor?

 

Unutma, soldaki noktaya odaklan.

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Cn-TTIqVy2GebdFEyX05yjrJXXs=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19726869/illusion.gif

 

We want to find where the conscious perception diverges from the physical sensation,”

...

“There’s a whole world of visual analysis and computation and prediction that is happening outside of the visual system, happening in the frontal lobes,” Cavanagh says. That’s where the“story” of reality is constructed.

 

You can’t seem to consciously override the ‘wrong’ interpretation.”

 

The lesson: The stories our brains tell us about reality are extremely compelling, even when they are wrong.

 Bilinçli algı fiziksel duyumdan ayrılmaktadır.

 

Görme mekanizmamızın dışında, beynimizin ön kısımlarında gerçekleşen bir görsel analiz, hesaplama ve tahmin dünyası var.  Gerçekliğin “hikayesinin” inşa edildiği yer burasıdır.

 

Yanlış ‘gördüklerimizi’ bilinçli olarak geçersiz kılamıyoruz.  Çünkü yanlışlığın kaynağı bizden habersiz yorum yapan beynimiz.  Ama beynimizin bize gerçeklik hakkında anlattığı hikayeler, yanlış olsalar bile son derece ilgi çekicidir.

 

We’re not seeing reality. Our vision runs 100 milliseconds behind the real world.

Why are we seeing a story about the world — a story — and not the real deal? It’s not because evolution made our minds flawed. It’s actually an adaptation.

 

“We don’t have the necessary machinery, and we wouldn’t even want it, to process carefully all of the amount of information that we’re constantly bombarded with,”

 

“The dirty little secret about sensory systems is that they’re slow, they’re lagged, they’re not about what’s happening right now but what’s happening 50 milliseconds ago, or, in the case for vision, hundreds of milliseconds ago.

Gerçeğin kendisini göremiyoruz. Görme yeteneğimiz gerçek dünyanın 100 milisaniye gerisinde.  Neden dünya hakkında bir hikaye görüyoruz - bir hikaye – gerçeğin kendisi değil? Bunun nedeni, doğanın evrimyasasının zihinlerimizi kusurlu hale getirmesi değil. Aslında değişen koşullara bir uyumun soucu bu uyarlama.

 

"Sürekli bombardımana tutulduğumuz bu olağanüstü büyük  bilgi miktarını dikkatli bir şekilde işlemeyi istemeyiz bile. Doğal olarak bunun için gerekli mekanizmalarada  sahip değiliz. "

 

"Duyu sistemleriyle ilgili kirli küçük sır, yavaş olmaları, gecikmeli olmaları, şu anda ne olduğuyla değil, 50 milisaniye önce veya görme durumunda, yüzlerce milisaniye önce ne olduğuyla ilgili olmalarıdır.

 

So the brain predicts the path of motion before it happens. It tells us a story about where the object is heading, and this story becomes our reality.

 

“For moving things — we see them ahead on their path of motion by just enough.” The illusion here is actually functional. It helps us overcome these delays and see things ... where they will be when we get there.”

 

what we experience as consciousness is primarily the prediction, not the real-time feed. The actual sensory information just serves as error correction. “If you were always using sensory information, errors would accumulate in ways that would lead to quite catastrophic effects on your motor control,”. Our brains like to predict as much as possible, then use our senses to course-correct when the predictions go wrong.

Böylece beyin, hareketin yolunu hareket gerçekleşmeden önce tahmin eder. Bize nesnenin nereye gittiği hakkında bir hikaye anlatır ve bu hikaye bizim gerçeğimiz olur.

 

"Hareket eden nesneleri hareket yollarında yeterince ileride görüyoruz." Buradaki illüzyon aslında işlevseldir. Bu illüzyon gecikmelerin üstesinden gelmemize ve nesneleri oraya vardıklarında nerede olacaklarsa orada görmemize yardımcı oluyor.”

 

Bilinç olarak deneyimlediğimiz şey, gerçekte olan, gerçekleşen değil, önceliklebir  tahmindir. Gerçek duyusal bilgi sadece hata düzeltme işlevi görür. "Her zaman duyusal bilgileri kullanıyor olsaydınız, motor kontrolünüz üzerinde çok feci etkilere yol açacak şekilde hatalar birikirdi". Beynimiz mümkün olduğu kadar çok tahminde bulunmayı sever, sonra tahminler yanlış gittiğinde rotayı düzeltmek için duyularımızı kullanır.

Brian Resnick, The neuroscience of optical illusions, explained - Vox, Jun 22, 2020

Sunday, February 27, 2022

Illusions

 

ILLUSIONS

 The evolution of human being has developed special frames to handle extremely difficult situations.  These are called illusions.  The brain tries to handle the difficult situation itself with builtin abilities with special tendencies or processes.  In fact what we perceive as reality is the reality our brain creates using the information it receives from the outer environment.

  “Visual illusions occur due to properties of the visual areas of the brain as they receive and process information. In other words, your perception of an illusion has more to do with how your brain works -- and less to do with the optics of your eye. [3] 

  “Psychologist Richard Gregory classified optical illusions into physical, physiological and cognitive, subdivided in turn into fictions, ambiguities, paradoxes and distortions. These different effects involve distinct mechanisms and various levels of neural processing. [4] ”

  “Visual illusions are defined by the dissociation between the physical reality and the subjective perception of an object or event. When we experience a visual illusion, we may see something that is not there or fail to see something that is there. Because of this disconnect between perception and reality, visual illusions demonstrate the ways in which the brain can fail to re-create the physical world. [5] “

  Illusions are not limited to the visual domain.  Illusions may vary from social illusions to economical, visual to bodily felt ones and even more.

 REFERENCES:

[1] Emotional Hangover? NYU Researchers Find that There is Dec 31, 2016 New York City

[2] Sartre, Sketch for a Theory of Emotions

[3] CARI NIERENBERG, Optical Illusions: When Your Brain Can't Believe Your Eyes, ABC News Medical November 2008

[4] Why Optical Illusions Fool Our Brain, Open Mind October 2020

[5] Susana Martinez-CondeStephen L. Macknik, The Neuroscience of Illusion, How tricking the eye reveals the inner workings of the brain, Scientific American

 

Friday, February 25, 2022

Emotion regulation - Duygu yönetimi

 

The process model involved in emotion generation:

(a) an emotional situation arises;

(b) attention  is directed toward the situation;

(c) an appraisal of the situation is formed; and finally

(d) an emotional response to the situation is generated (Gross & Thompson, 2007) [3] .

 

emotion regulation strategies

1-situation selection and situation modification, primary impact on the emotional situation.

3-attentional deployment, such as distraction and rumination.

4-cognitive change, such as cognitive reappraisal.

5-response modulation, such as expressive suppression

---------------------

Duygu oluşumuyla ilgili süreç:

(a) duygusal bir durum ortaya çıkar

(b) dikkat bu duruma yönelir

(c) durumun bir değerlendirilmesi oluşturulur

(d) duruma ilişkin duygusal bir yanıt oluşturulur

 

duygu yönetme stratejileri:

1- durum seçimi ve durumun değişikliğe uğratılması durum üzerinde ilk tepki

2-dikkatin devreye alınması, dikkat dağıtma, sürekli tekrarlayarak önemini azaltma

3-anlamsal olarak karşı çıkma, anlamını yeniden değerlendirme

4-yanıtın değişikliğe uğratılması

Friday, January 07, 2022

Trivial things

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. 
For knowledge is limited to all we know and understand, 
while imagination embraces the entire world, 
 and all there ever will be to know and understand.” 

But good things that may happen to us 
is limited by the human imagination. 
 The bad things that may happen is limitless. 

 Imagination is a dynamic process 
and it redefines itself the moment we understand. 
Like our feelings...

ARS

Saturday, December 04, 2021

Frames of Cognition - 3

 


FRAMES OF COGNITION - 3

 

Each perceivable context triggers some node/word in our semantic vocabulary.  In this sense the daily usage of frames inherently function the same as the cognitive, psychological and sociological uses of frames.

 What happens if a simple frame that is perceived, cannot signify a node/word in our semantic vocabulary?  This happens in three possibilities... 


First the signification may reside somewhere else outside the semantic memory.  It may be a feeling. In amygdala, feelings disappear when addressed. It may be a combination of feelings learned, a wide span of fear vs. anger.

 

Second it may be a partial context that may fit a signification when completed, either feeling or semantic.

 

Third it may be a completely new context trigging/pointing to a new feeling or  gradually a new semantic object. 

 “ ‘Emotion’ is a state of mind,” Davachi says and continues. “These findings make clear that our cognition is highly influenced by preceding experiences and, specifically, that emotional brain states can persist for long periods of time. [1]

 Sartre says “Emotion is a specific manner of apprehending the world” and adds “Emotion is a transformation of the world. [2]

 Sartre goes further than Devachi and links the situation that emotion exists in, with the emotion.  Joy is a feeling that is created by specific situations.  It is a state of mind tightly connected to specific events in life.  The specific events are placed in the episodic memory. 

 Joy is triggered by events that are similar to the past events that have created joy.  Each person may have different experiences related to joy.  While roughly close, each person may differ in what they feel as joy, as a result of this. 

 The joyous events in the episodic memory are connected to a specific location in the amygdala.  Joy as word and abstract concept is primarily created and located in the cerebrum/semantic memory.  As all the feelings when joy is perceived consciously, namely when you become conscious of it, it triggers semantic joy and disappears as a feeling.

 Vigilance is a mixed feeling.  We become vigil against a possible bad situation for somebody or something.   The nodes in the semantic memory form the collections which trigg the vigilance frame.  These nodes are instances that exist in the semantic memory.  If the nodes of a frame’s collection do not exist as instantiations, but if they exist as a polymorphic possibility, they may point out to a state of mind rather than a specific node in the semantic memory.

 Vigilance is a state of mind.  The collection of vigilance frame has pointers of various sets of related dangers/risks that may be inherited by polymorphic instances.   But the reality of external input is not there yet.  As Sartre has stated “the emotional subject and the object of emotion are united in an indissoluble synthesis. [2] ”  So, the emotion can not exist fully.   The connection of possible cases create a mild sensitivity feeling of/to a general amygdala connection triggered by these: vigilance, wakefulness, etc.

 What happens if a partial context that may fit some part of a signification when completed?  This may happen in complex situations.  For ex.  Some event may be joyous but sad on the other hand.

The evolution of human being has developed special frames to handle extremely difficult situations.

These are called illusions.  The brain tries to handle the difficult situation itself with builtin abilities

With special tendencies or processes.  In fact what we perceive as reality is the reality our brain creates using the information it receives from the outer environment.

 Visual illusions occur due to properties of the visual areas of the brain as they receive and process information. In other words, your perception of an illusion has more to do with how your brain works -- and less to do with the optics of your eye. [3]

 Psychologist Richard Gregory classified optical illusions into physical, physiological and cognitive, subdivided in turn into fictions, ambiguities, paradoxes and distortions. These different effects involve distinct mechanisms and various levels of neural processing. [4]

 “Visual illusions are defined by the dissociation between the physical reality and the subjective perception of an object or event. When we experience a visual illusion, we may see something that is not there or fail to see something that is there. Because of this disconnect between perception and reality, visual illusions demonstrate the ways in which the brain can fail to re-create the physical world. [5]

 Illusions are not limited to the visual domain.  Illusions may vary from social illusions to economical, visual to bodily felt ones and even more.  I will ponder on the concept of illusions on my next article.  I will also handle cases that the percepted inputs are not complete.

REFERENCES:

[1] Emotional Hangover? NYU Researchers Find that There is Dec 31, 2016 New York City

[2] Sartre, Sketch for a Theory of Emotions

[3] CARI NIERENBERG, Optical Illusions: When Your Brain Can't Believe Your Eyes, ABC News Medical November 2008

[4] Why Optical Illusions Fool Our Brain, Open Mind October 2020

[5] Susana Martinez-CondeStephen L. Macknik, The Neuroscience of Illusion, How tricking the eye reveals the inner workings of the brain, Scientific American

 

Friday, October 22, 2021

Frames of Cognition – 2

 

FRAMES OF COGNITION – 2



In “Frames of Cognition-1”, I have stated “It seems frames in daily language signify a different meaning than frames in cognition specially in psychology and sociology.

 

The daily usage of frame signifies an enclosing border.  The cognitive use of frame signifies a context and a decision of real/true or not real/false. 

 

The difference of daily and cognitive usage is the triggering mechanism in the cognitive usage.  The cognitive usage also keeps the borders in the sense of being in a collection of objects or not.   But it provides a trigging mechanism and a pointer to an action/schema in addition.  If an input is in the collection of the frame it trigges its schema.  This is a fundemental difference between the daily and other usages of frames arising from the inherent structure of the human brain.”

 

I have provided some references on the use of frames in different areas of interest also.

 

Here. in “Frames of Cognition-2”, I will explain why the difference between the daily and other usages of frames is only on the surface.  In fact, frames inherently has the same signified functionality. 

 

A picture surrounded by a clear context signifies a painting or a picture. 

 

1-      If the context is composed of a wall and an ornamented frame and a picture in it we simply thing it is a painting.  The presentation frame is the context that trigs/signifies the meaning ‘painting’.

2-      If the context is a computer screen we would percieve it as a simple picture.  The presentation frame/context   trigs/signifies the meaning ‘picture’ or ‘simple picture’.

 

In fact even a simple frame signifies a meaning in our semantic vocabulary such as a window frame or picture frame which are polymorphic instances of the semantic node ‘frame’.

 

Each percievable context trigges some node/word in our semantic vocabulary.  In this sense the daily usage of frames inherently function the same as the cognitive, psychological and sociological uses of frames.

 

What happens if a simple frame that is percieved, cannot signify a node/word in our semantic vocabulary?  This happens in three possibilities... 

 

First the signification may reside somewhere else outside the semantic memory.  It may be a feeling. 

Second it may be a partial context that may fit a signification when completed, either feeling or semantic.

Third it may be a completely new context trigging/pointing to a new feeling or a new semantic object.

 

In  “Frames of Cognition-3”, I will first ponder on the feelings of joy and vigilance and on how their processes works.  Then I will brainstorm on the role of frames in the processing of feelings and the interaction of cognition and emotion.

 

This will prepare the substructure for studying illusions and specially aviation illusions in my later blog articles.