Matt Faunce
7/14/2011 3:04:00 PM
Slogoin wrote:
> > > I wonder, though, if we can differentiate between levels of things learned.
>
> Not sure I understand what you mean by "level".
That's my question. Do levels exist? If so, what determines the level? If levels don't exist is everything learned on an equal footing?
Cognitive theory in a nut shell:
1. Mental irritation provides the impetus for the instinctive random actions
2. Nothing learned yet, random actions are tried, any action that is available. The more severe the irritation the more forceful action.
3. Discovering by observation what action cured the irritation quickest and most thoroughly.
4. Repeating these actions and thus reinforcing the understanding that it works.
If the irritation isn't cured thoroughly or quickly enough, but is cured somewhat, random action and observation continues. The final habit might then become a combination of actions.
The habit is established by carving out pathways in the brain. Obviously we are born with a brain, but, how much development is done without having learned anything. Does the mother and father's learning change the dna or the sperm and egg? If so, does the parent's learning count as our learning? Is this what constitutes pre-wiring? That is, are habits passed through the dna, and manifested in the pre-wiring or the infant's brain?
> Metaphor looks like it's a lot more than
> just a random connection like a mnemonic.
What's a random connection? I think there are random actions but a sentient being then observes what works, and then purposefully repeats the actions that work. How is a mnemonic random?
> The question I have about these pitch metaphors is why to they map
> only one way?
I say, in so far as we are similar, we will map our metaphors similarly. Remember when I wrote this:
"There are people of various philosophies here who include spirits in
what they consider universal. Spirits' needs and desires are assumed
to be fundamentally different from carnal beings, so given this there
is pretty much no knowledge that is truly universal and therefore
truly fundamental."
Maybe space aliens too. I bet the alien being in Tarkovski's movie Solaris wouldn't map the metaphors the same way. (If in fact it was an alien being.)
Matt