We are definitely learned that simle questions must have simple answers.What do you think about it? Is it realistic? Do simple questions usually have complicated answers?
Yes it does:
Mt-pyramid Wholistic Geometric Quester: mtpyramid.weebly.com
MT-pyramid Wholistic Geometric Quester in relation to individual's personal spatial geometric pattern: Googol Search.
Below is a SNIP from a forthcoming article, "Morgan's canon," that I was invited to write for the forthcoming Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior. To see the full article, please go to my website:
https://psyc.franklin.uga.edu/directory/people/roger-k-thomas
Look among "Recent Publications."
SNIP
X: Simplicity in Philosophy
Emblematic and representative of articles and books by philosophers of science on the subject of simplicity as a basis for choosing between or among alternative explanations, theories, etc., 50+ years ago was Bunge’s (1963) The myth of simplicity: Problems of scientific philosophy. For psychological science, perhaps, the most recurring problem with simplicity as a criterion for choosing among alternative explanations is that most explanations involve unrecognized or hidden assumptions that confound being able to determine which is the simplest explanation. Bunge’s view that simplicity was a myth or, at least, that simplicity is almost forbiddingly capable of being defined or applied continues 50+ years later. For a recent example, Fitzpatrick (2015, pp. 39-40) wrote:
The putative role of considerations of simplicity in the current practice
of science gives rise to a number of philosophical problems, including
the problem of precisely defining and measuring theoretical simplicity,
and the problem of justifying preferences for simpler theories. As this
survey of the literature on simplicity in the philosophy of science
demonstrates, these problems have turned out to be surprisingly resistant
to resolution, and there remains a live debate amongst philosophers
of science about how to deal with them.
Scorzato (2013, p. 2867) addressed some problems associated with assumptions and language that prohibit the ability to decide which explanation is simplest.
Simple assumptions represent a decisive reason to prefer one theory
to another in everyday scientific praxis. But this praxis has little
philosophical justification, since there exist many notions of simplicity, and
those that can be defined precisely strongly depend on the language in
which the theory is formulated. The language dependence is a natural
feature – to some extent – but it is also believed to be a fatal problem.
. . . . in fact, the concepts that enable a very simple formulation, are not necessarily measurable . . . . precisely those concepts that make the
theory extremely simple are provably not measurable.
If Fitzpatrick’s and Scorzato’s observations and conclusions are not enough to make a working behavioral scientist dizzy with uncertainty about using parsimony or simplicity as a criterion to choose among alternative explanations of behavior, Sober’s (2015) Ockham’s Razors: A User’s Manual should persuade behavioral scientists to surrender completely any attempt to use simplicity to choose among alternative explanations.
If there is such a question needing clarification, the easiest way is to experiment at a personal level; to be up-to-date.
Exploring concept is Contextual, to be validated in time and place.
Referring to the past is not applicable to the present or future time.
Are we looking for finding similarities for evaluating RESEARCH FINDINGS or RESEARCHING TO FIND FACTS?
EC3 & EC4; Individual Difference; Exponential thinking and wisdom for Re-Modelling Methodological approaches.
Technology is in our side for "CONTEXTUAL EXPLORATION; Spatial Thinking; Shaping our research question be addressed Multidimensional.
Mehri Takhvar. When you can’t tell me what a “fact” is, we may have a basis for discussion. It was once accepted as fact that phlogiston caused fire, that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the Earth to cite but three so- called “facts” amongst many more since refuted.
Roger K. Thomas,
Thank you for insightful question.
My personal experience tells me that: FACT IS CONTEXTUAL TO BE EXPLORED IN TIME AND PLACE.
This is governed by personal spatial geometry in time and place. Who? where? how? when?
MT-pyramid Wholistic Geometric Quester: mtpyramid.weebly.com
If however, we struggle defining facts, what are we searching for?
Best Regards
Many people, even and physicists, are still conviced that simple questions must have simple answers. In my opinion the reason for that lies in the nature of their education. In other words, the nature of their education bothers them to see the ''right'' answer. It is the triumph of linearity. For example,the simple question can be given by simple equations of motions and simple initial conditions.Drawing the trajectory in the phase space, we can often see that the answer is chaotic.
Roger K. Thomas,
"Do simple questions usually have complicated answers?" - You ask. Sometimes this is the case, other times this is not the case. What do you mean by simple questions?
As per my understanding, science looks for parsimony and hence simple questions should have simple answers. Simple questions and simple answers may be deep. It is often the case that complicated answers hide (e.g., our ignoranace) more than they reveal (e.g., a significant understanding of the topic at issue).
Once, Einstein astutely remaraked that if we cannnot put it simply what we know, then it is is lilely that we do not master it. This idea echoes in Wittgenstein's thinking when he declared that what can be said, can be said simple. The pinciple of simplicity should not be taken for the triumph of linearity, as, with my all respect, seems to be the case of our colleague Dragoljub. The principle of simplicity, not linearity, lies also at the heart of W.Occam's razor argument, that is, entities are not to be unnecessarily multpliplied. Complicated answers often resort to a multitude of words. And "with a multitude of words transgressions are increased" (Book of Proverbs).
As I see it, simple questions are often, say, irritating questions, that is, questions that go against the satus quo and the mainstream and whose answer advances knowledge and lead us to a better knowledge of the unknown.
KInd regards,
Orlando
Dear Orlando M Lourenço I used ''triumph of the linearity'' with intence to remind that nineteenth century and almost all twentieth century were era of domination of the linearity in the classical physics. This means that I didn't think that the principle of simplicity arises from linearity. I wanted to say that the chaos is often feature of very simple systems and it is possible to say, roughly, that simple questions usually have complicated answers. All the best.
Dear Dragoljub,
Thank for your reactions to my post. I understand now that when you spoke about the 'triumph of the linearity'' you had in mind the linearity in the classical physics in almost all twentieth century . If this is the case, then I agree with.you.
Even so, the principle of linearity and the principle of simplicity are distinct principles. I am in favor of the principle of simplicity, not in favor of the principle of linearity. It is too common, at least in the social sciences, to jugde as deep what we do not understand. The argument is that if one does not understand, for example, an oral presentation delivered at scientific meeting, then it should be profund. It this were not the case, then we would have understand it.
I wonder whether you are acquainted with Sokol's hoax. He purposely submitted to the Journal Social Text a manuscript with undefined jargon where he played with words. To his surprise, all the blind reviewers recommended publication of the paper and yet the manuscript was no more than a pure hoax. Needlless to say, Sokol's intention was to cast doubts on the so called blind-peer review system.
All the best,
Orlando
yes, Some time the simple question is still unanswered. So, it may come up with complicated answers or simply simple answer as expected. There are a variety of question from centuries whether mathematical, physical or philosophical all questions can be answered in different ways.
What's your definition of "Simple Question"? I might say it's a simple one while in fact it's not to others..
Simple questions naturally deal with the essence of things that is the most difficult to handle due to the descriptive thus lastly tautologic method of the current sciences that accordingly even complicated answers, seeing their methodology applied a posteriori to the event to be described, cannot solve.
So, I tend to conclude that the current sciences cannot answer simple questions at all!
The answer depends not only on the question, but also on the audience to which you are responding.
Do simple questions usually have complicated answers?
Not necessary - it depends on several factors e.g.
First you need to really agree on what is “simple” (Rajaa A. Mahmoud ). Is simple always brief? In this case, the simplest question-answer pair is: “Why? - Because.”
In my opinion, any question can be answered with varying degrees of depth (the most “simple” one is, for example: “What is the Universe?” I will respond differently to a five-year-old child or student. If the cosmologist (or, God forbid, a philosopher) asks me, the best the answer will be: "I don't know"). If we think carefully, then any question becomes difficult.
Therefore, I distinguish the questions here on RG not as simple or complex, but "professorial", "student", and ... the rest. Professorial - these are questions, the answer to which the questioner knows, he rejects any other options and waits for the opportunity to express his only correct understanding. Student questions are questions, the standard answers to which can be found in any textbook, but it is easier for a student to ask than to search it for himself. But the third option - this is just what is interesting to answer ...
I agree, Some time the simple question is still unanswered or you can say not simply answered.
In most cases both, the questions are simple and clear, the answer is easy and clear and does not tolerate interpretation.
Shakir Tuleab
Then we can not do without the concept of trivial. Simple is trivial? We have not determined what we consider as "simple." If this is the answer from the category of "well-known that ...", then maybe this is not quite the right answer? Six hundred years ago, the answer to the question of how the solar system works was simple and unambiguous. But now this question is answered in a completely different way, but more often also unambiguously. And if you think about it, old answer was also correct (it all comes down to choosing a reference point). So there are no simple questions, in my opinion, there are simple answers.
"Simplicity is ultimate sophistication" by Leonardo Da Vinci
and I would add that sophistication is a rare phenomenon in this world
The more we have understood the more simpe is our answer. BUT for the person asking a question that answer might be complicate to understand. Therfore for example zen-koan is sometimes dificult to "undrstand".
"Mind is like a parasuite - it does not Funktion if it is not open!" (Frank Zappa)
Dear colleagues,
Thank you for your answers and contribution.
My question is actually metaphor for system behaviour known as being highly dependable on starting conditions. This, in chaos theory, is known as ''butterfly effect''. Also, simple systems can behave complex and vice versa, complex systems can behave simply.
Not necessarily. Simplicity and parsimony is a scientific ideal. It is possible to say much and spend little ink. What about Einstein's equation: E = mc2? It say much, say, by saying little,
Maybe, The answers of fill in the blanks as example, are sometimes complicated, Because of their focus on limited meaning or Specific word.
Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov
Thank you for this satisfying and valuable reply and clarifications. Wishing you the best of luck & happy new year.
well, sometimes simplistic questions prove tricky from the deep inside essence of them, therefore, i recommend the old saying which states that understanding the question forms half of the answer.
Some simple questions have simple answers (what time is is) and some have rather difficult or lengthy answers (what is the meaning of life), ASK my two daughters aged 3 and 6...
A dynamical system is a system whose state and variables evolve over time. All natural systems are nonlinear(inputs are not proportional to outputs). Chaotic and complex systems are examples of nonlinear dynamical systems.A small change in some variable will not necessary result in a small change in the system.Also, the large change in some variable will not necessary result in a large change in the system. But, a small change can have large outcomes. The last sentence describes essence of given question: Do simple questions usually have complicated answers?
Sometimes what seems like a simple question can be more complicated than it looks.
You’re also likely to get a more complex answer if you attract the attention of someone with experience
يعتمد ذلك على طبيعة الأسئلة وثقافة الذي يجيب على تلك الأسئلة وقد يكون الجواب سهلاً أو مركباً وواسعاً
Simple questions can have a simple answer too. Even complicated question can have a simple answer. On the other hands, an apparently simple or short question may have a complicated answer. It all depends on the theme and situation of Q & A or wisdom level of questioner & answerer.
Simple questions can have both simple or complicated answer it all depends on the way this question has been formulated
"Do simple questions usually have complicated answers?" The question is what is meant by simple questions and complicated answers. What seems to be simple for a knowledgeable person appears as complicated to a lay person. What seems to be true is that complicated questions appear to be simple once they are solved.
Dear Orlando M Lourenço
I agree with you, especially : " What seems to be true is that complicated questions appear to be simple once they are solved.". And, I think THAT might be the KEY overlap of the issues involved here.
Dear Brad Jesness,
Thank you for your kind words. I think that there is no good in asking questions whitout clarifying the meaning of the terms involved in the focal question.
This question -- Does God exist? -- is simple for those we believe in God. The question is difficult, I think, if we want to prove scientifically that God exist/does not exist.
Dear Orlando M Lourenço Carsten Weerth
I think the question does God exist is simply for every human being, not just for those who believe in God. The answer is complicated because it seeks proof of the existence of God in us. Our intuition, conscience, imagination commonsense and togetherness, probably, are God within us. The simple question does God exist, has a complicated and complex answer because it is not easy to explain conscience, intuition, imagination, togetherness, commonsense, their relationships, or why people often do not listen to their conscience, intuition, commonsense, etc. Moreover, I think that without God there is no science because how could science be without intuition, imagination, conscience and togetherness?
Simple question:
Are we alone?
OR
Is there life out in the universe apart from the life on Earth (as we know it)?
You should do a Philosophy 101 or Introduction into Philosophy class at a University...
Thousands of simple questions must be tackled on a daily basis and have been by mankind for thousands of years...
I had the luck to view Michael J. Sandel at Harvard University (thanks to edx.org) - Justice, which is freely available here, see
https://online-learning.harvard.edu/course/justice
The problem is that there are no criteria to determine whether a question is simple or complex before answering it. If there is an answer, then the question can be considered simple, but if there is no answer, then it is difficult. Here also there are such questions as: and who exactly has the answer, where and in what form (on what carrier and in what language or coding system) the information of the answer is stored, whether we have access to this information of the answer or we do not have. It turns out that the same question can be simple or complex for different people with different levels of competence or with different levels of access to information. Training is just designed to increase the level of competence of students, so that those questions that were difficult for them before training become simple after training. We must also teach the means of finding answers to questions, both online and through independent scientific research. There are tools for automating the process of cognition: these are intelligent systems and systems for automating scientific research:
http://lc.kubagro.ru/aidos/Works_on_identification_presentation_and_use_of_knowledge.htm
The development of technology and human development leads to the fact that what was previously impossible at all becomes possible, but difficult. Then it becomes less complicated. And then nothing at all
The work of Professor E. V. Lutsenko & C° for the identification, representation and use of knowledge, the logic and methodology of scientific cognition
Lutsenko E. V., Loiko V. I., Laptev V. N. Systems of representation and acquisition of knowledge: studies. manual / E. V. Lutsenko, V. I. Loiko, V. N. Laptev. - Krasnodar: Ekoinvest, 2018. – 513 p. ISBN 978-5-94215-415-8. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=35641755
Orlov A. I., Lutsenko E. V. System fuzzy interval mathematics. Monograph (scientific publication). – Krasnodar, Kuban State Agrarian University. 2014. - 600 p. ISBN 978-5-94672-757-0. http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=21358220
Lutsenko E. V. Mathematical and numerical modeling of the dynamics of probability density of human consciousness States in evolution using the theory of Markov random processes / E. V. Lutsenko / / Polytematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2005. - No. 07(015). P. 59 – 76. – IDA [article ID]: 0150507004. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2005/07/pdf/04.pdf, 1,125 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Automated technologies of knowledge management in agro-industrial holding / E. V. Lutsenko, V. I. Loiko, O. A. Makarevich / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2009. - No. 08(052). P. 98 – 109. – The cipher of Informregistr: 0420900012\0088, IDA [article ID]: 0520908007. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2009/08/pdf/07.pdf, 0.75 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Intellectual consulting system for identifying technological knowledge and making decisions on their effective application on the basis of system-cognitive analysis of business processes / E. V. Lutsenko, V. E. Korzhakov, A. I. Ladyga / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2010. - No. 05(059). P. 79 – 110. – The cipher of Informregistr: 0421000012\0091, IDA [article ID]: 0591005007. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2010/05/pdf/07.pdf, 2 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Development of the intellectual system "Eidos-Astra", removing restrictions on the dimension of knowledge bases and the resolution of cognitive functions / E. V. Lutsenko, A. p. Trunev, E. A. Trunev / / Polytematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (Scientific journal of Kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2011. - No. 05(069). P. 353 – 377. – The cipher of Informregistr: 0421100012\0159, IDA [article ID]: 0691105031. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2011/05/pdf/31.pdf, 1,562 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Methodological aspects of identification, presentation and use of knowledge in the ASC-analysis and intellectual system "Eidos" / E. V. Lutsenko / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (Scientific journal of Kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2011. - No. 06(070). Pp. 233-280. – The cipher of Informregistr: 0421100012\0197, IDA [article ID]: 0701106018. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2011/06/pdf/18.pdf, 3 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Method of cognitive clusterization or clusterization based on knowledge (clusterization in system-cognitive analysis and intellectual system "Eidos") / E. V. Lutsenko, V. E. Korzhakov / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2011. - No. 07(071). S. 528 – 576. – The cipher of Informregistr: 0421100012\0253, IDA [article ID]: 0711107040. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2011/07/pdf/40.pdf, 3,062 y. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Forecasting of sunflower yield in the Krasnodar territory using system-cognitive analysis (Part 2: Formal statement of the problem and transformation of initial data into information, and its knowledge) / E. V. Lutsenko, N. O. Poznysheva / / Polytematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of Kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2012. - No. 10(084). Pp. 384 – 409. – IDA [article ID]: 0841210031. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2012/10/pdf/31.pdf, 1,625 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. whether social and economic phenomena are Subject to some analogs or generalizations of the principle of relativity of Galileo and Einstein and whether the Noether theorem and conservation laws are fulfilled for them? / E. V. Lutsenko // Polythematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (the Scientific magazine of Kubsau) [an Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2013. - No. 07(091). P. 219 – 254. – IDA [article ID]: 0911307014. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2013/07/pdf/14.pdf, 2.25 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Formation of subjective (virtual) models of physical and social reality by human consciousness and unjustified giving them an ontological status (hypostasis) / E. V. Lutsenko / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2015. - No. 09(113). C. 1 – 32. – IDA [article ID]: 1131509001. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2015/09/pdf/01.pdf, 2 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Principles and prospects of correct content interpretation of subjective (virtual) models of physical and social reality formed by human consciousness / E. V. Lutsenko / / Polytematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2016. - No. 01 (115). P. 22 – 75. – IDA [article ID]: 1151601003. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2016/01/pdf/03.pdf, 3,375 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Problems and prospects of the theory and methodology of scientific knowledge and automated system-cognitive analysis as an automated method of scientific knowledge that provides meaningful phenomenological modeling / E. V. Lutsenko / / Polythematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban state agrarian University (Scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2017. - No. 03 (127). C. 1 – 60. - IDA [article ID]: 1271703001. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2017/03/pdf/01.pdf, 3.75 C. p. l.
Lutsenko E. V. Cognitive veterinary science – veterinary science of digital society: definition of basic concepts / E. V. Lutsenko, E. K. Pechurina, A. E. Sergeev / / Politematic network electronic scientific journal of Kuban state agrarian University (scientific journal of kubgau) [Electronic resource]. - Krasnodar: Kubgau, 2019. - No. 08(152). S. 141 – 199. – IDA [article ID]: 1521908015. - Access mode: http://ej.kubagro.ru/2019/08/pdf/15.pdf, 3,688 C. p. l.
Проблема в том, что нет критериев определить является вопрос простым или сложным до ответа на него. Если ответ есть, то вопрос может считаться простым, но если ответа нет - то сложным. Вот тут и возникают такие вопросы как: а у кого конкретно есть ответ, где и в какой форме (на каком носителе и на каком языке или системе кодирования) хранится информация ответа, имеем ли доступ к этой информации ответа или не имеем. Получается, что один и тот же вопрос может быть простым или сложным для разных людей с разными уровнями компетентности или с разным уровнем доступа к информации. Обучение как раз и призвано повышать уровень компетентности учащихся, чтобы те вопросы, которые до обучения для них были сложными после обучения стали простыми. Мы должны также учить средствам поиска ответа на вопросы как в сети, так и путем самостоятельного научного исследования. Есть средства автоматизации процесса познания: это интеллектуальные системы и системы автоматизации научных исследований:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337313081_Simplicity_as_Ultimate_Sophistication
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.
However, I would also like to state, that every fool can makes things complicated.
Almost all questions in science and life can be simplified, to a certain bearable degree, but this requires also artistic and creative qualities.
To cite G.B. Shaw, for example: economics is the art to make the best of your life.
We can also try to torture the data, until they confess to everything, as R.Coase opined.
What is a simple question? ”Does God exist?“ is actually not (!) a simple question because infinite complexity lies in the subject "God“.
So, a question must be titled ”simple“ if and only if their subject and complement(s) can be unequivocally understood by everyone without making further assumptions thru axioms.
This is virtually never the case! Hence, ”simple“ questions do not exist. Thus, any answer to any question is naturally ”complicated“.
Here is a question couldn't be simpler at the first glance: Can a butterfly in a meadow in Montenegro causes a storm tens of kilometers away by swinging its wings?
First of all, let's be clear: that isn't a simple question! ;)
I agree with the previous contributors who have pointed out that there is no real way of determining a priori which questions are simple and which are not. Speaking as a linguist, it seems to me that just because a question is propositionally simple, does not mean that either the question, the answers, or the aspect of reality being questioned are conceptually simple.
I also think that the question presupposes that there is only one answer. That said, I suspect that for any question, there is at least one simple answer -- but it might not be an answer we want to hear, or the simple answer may require additional assumptions that we are not willing to adopt. For example, if I ask "why do I exist?", a simple answer might be "to fulfill your fate". It is a simple answer-- but I suspect most modern people would find it very unsatisfactory.
What is complicated is the reasoning and belief systems underpinning those answers. For example, for any yes/no question, the possible (simple) answers are "yes", "no" and "maybe". What makes the answer complicated is the justification, not the answer.
It depend on the profession of the responder. If you ask a psychologist you surely get a complicated answer.
Some seemingly simple questions may ask for an explanation of some notion so their answer tend to be complex in that they exhibit intricate chains of reasoning.
Béatrice Marianne Ewalds-Kvist !
Perhaps you are a psychologist?
If a person is difficult to answer a question, it means that he does not know the true answer to it. The truth is simple and can be expressed in a few simple words
To Mr.Eugene Veniaminovich Lutsenko ,
What is known is not true, and what is unknown is not ignorance.
I can't remember of the name of author of this saying, but I know he got a Nobel prise for physics..
We are mistaken when we think that we are not mistaken.
Father and son are talking loudly about something in raised tones. The father tries unsuccessfully to convince the son of something. However, he responds sharply and peremptorily in a radical style and with absolute confidence. The son does not accept any reasonable arguments from the father.
In the end, the father does not stand up and says:
-Only a complete idiot can be absolutely confident in his statements.
And the son asks:
"Are you absolutely sure of that?".
- Of course, absolutely!, the father answers
Béatrice Marianne Ewalds-Kvist !
In principle, if there is no psychologist nearby, then a philosopher will also fit
To Eugene Veniaminovich Lutsenko
Wonderful, witty story.
Kind, regards
Sometimes it's impossible give the simple answer to the simple question.
simple or complicated is very subjective terms. So the very question is itself is fundamentally wrong.
level of difficulty of an answer is judged by the one who is asking the question as per his intellectual capacity.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking