Who will determine exactly (by function, neuro-physiology, etc) the difference of the phenomena:
- Mind (eng), ум (ru), esprit (fr), mente (esp), geist (de), 心灵 (chi);
- Reason (eng), разум (ru), raison (fr), razón (esp), vernunft (de), 理智 (chi);
- Intelligence (eng, fr), интеллект (ru), intellegentia (lat), inteligencia (esp), intelligenz (de), 智力 (chi);
- Intellect (eng), intellectus (lat), Intellekt (de);
- Wisdom (eng), sapiens, sapientia (lat), мудрость (ru), sagesse (fr), sabiduría (esp), weisheit (de), 智慧 (chi);
- рассудок (ru), (eng ?), entendement (fr), verstand (de), 知性 (chi).
From Encyclopedia Brittannica: - MIND - https://www.britannica.com/topic/mind - REASON - https://www.britannica.com/topic/reason - INTELLIGENCE - https://www.britannica.com/topic/human-intelligence-psychology what's
Linguists, philosophers, psychologists, biologists, physicians, professionals of neuroscience! It is historically a multiplication of entities in different sciences, production of terms with similar meanings, juggling with gloss? Or, have precise boundaries in the semantics, thesaurus, essence of the phenomena?
Or rights I. P. Pavlov by combining all phenomena in the Phenomenon - "Higher Nervous Activity"?
- NOO, (nóos) (Ancient Greek), 智慧 (chi) - not only the earliest term, but uniting "thought, mind, intelligence, intellect, wisdom, insight" in a single Phenomenon!!! https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BD%CF%8C%CE%BF%CF%82 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%99%BA%E6%85%A7
Probably won V. I. Vernadsky with his term "Noo-sphere"?...
I think I was lucky that at the time I was engaged in the development of the concept "NOO-GENESIS" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noogenesis
But Your opinion?...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Neuroscience