Do we lack imagination for how great our imagination (representation of "things" INCLUDING ACROSS CIRCUMSTANCES/SITUATIONS ) can be? Why would this NOT be the case? There ARE profound reasons to expect biases and for "things" to be overly situationally-concretized :
Two big (and near-certain) reasons: [( Don't be offended or discouraged; all this (below) simply means the vast majority of us -- and certainly the VAST majority of behavioral theorists/researchers -- are lousy phenomenologists, lousy existentialists, and lousy empiricists: all curable conditions. )]
(1) we are frequent dualists, pitting THIS against THAT, as 2 necessarily disparate TYPES of "things", when they may well not be (and, in fact, often aren't). One big example here is nature vs. nurture.
(2) From philosophy (our historical/cultural background) we tend to identify just-named things (things simply with names) as if they are truly real (and things "unto themselves"). A prime example here is our idea that we "use" 'our' memories, when (in fact), by the definitions of the Memories themselves, they constitute EXPERIENCE ITSELF [(and neither is "used" by us OR us by them, in any traditionally conceptualized deterministic manner)].
These 2 very strong tendencies yield profound biases against what we can IMAGINE we can represent in so-called "memory", especially real aspects of "things" found ONLY, and found meaningful, only considering (or across) MULTIPLE circumstances/situations (aka MULTIPLE "sets of circumstances"). If abstraction (abstract thinking) abilities depend on just such things (such a combination of actual experience and represented circumstances), THEN : given our biases, we may well see "abstractions" as unconnected to concrete realities -- when this is most certainly NOT the case (if you are an empiricist). There may be multiple and even diverse circumstances involved in conceptualizing/representing an abstract concept (but yet allow their SHOWING in concrete aspects of these situations AND in our RESPONSE __PATTERNS__). _AND_ SUCH SITUATIONS MAY WELL BE "HANDLED" BY the Memories (the different faculties that HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED), objectively speaking. But, we cannot allow ourselves to "think of that". Here is some of the "un-faced" very-likely realities:
There may very well be some innate guidances of perception/attention differing (or emerging) FROM stage-to-stage (levels, if you like) of child development (ontogeny) that ALLOW FOR THIS, i.e. that which involves across-circumstances and multiple-circumstances, FOR key representations ("imagination") and conceptualization. And, that innate guidance is highly likely -- though contradicted by many, many (even most all) modern perspectives (BUT NOT CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE)!! IN FACT: This view (MY view, just expressed) is highly likely just given the limitations of working memory that seem to be always present -- and just that alone [(so, not even too much thought need be involved here, to see this point; also note: the awesome capacities OUR OTHER "memory" faculties have -- as even shown to a great extent in "lower animals", allowing for sophisticated and selective "memories") ].
All my writings here on Researchgate represent all the real possibilities of our imagination AND THIS LIKELY REALITY OF THE NATURE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT. And, I contrast this thoroughly with modern views and assumptions AND outline the full set of empirical consequences stemming from our such very-possible characteristic (species-typical) abilities/capacities/guidances. AND: Included among the consequences (repercussions) of this VIEW, just expressed, include some TESTABLE (verifiable/falsifiable) hypotheses -- well-supporting my perspective (and approach): Ethogram Theory . Read the 800 or so pages I have written about all-of-the-above, and get back to me.
Dear followers and readers:
This very Question and my Answer in the expansion of the Question might clearly summarize much of what you might like about me. So, don't skip this one (even if the title somehow discourages you). Also, as is not atypical, I did about an hour of editing.
Also see my assessment of the following, in my Comment under it (also: an alternative to All THAT is offered, of of course):
Article Editors' Introduction: Abstract Concepts: Structure, Process...
For more, and for details of my perspective and approach, see:
See: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Not_Psychology_for_Psychology_but_open_tough_thorough_true_fully_phenomenologically-based_real_empiricism_for_all_explanations_and_understandings and the Answers following that Discussion Question for elaborations/clarifications.
AND:
READ:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286920820_A_Human_Ethogram_Its_Scientific_Acceptability_and_Importance_now_NEW_because_new_technology_allows_investigation_of_the_hypotheses_an_early_MUST_READ
and
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329428629_Essentially_all_Recent_Essays_on_Ethogram_Theory
and
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Human-Ethology-and-Development-Ethogram-Theory
(see the Project Log of this Project to see many important Updates)
ALSO (not among the 200 pages of major papers and 512 pages of essays in my "book", you already have been directed to) the following link gets you to 100 more pages of worthwhile essays composed after the 512 pages: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331907621_paradigmShiftFinalpdf (you CAN find the pdf at this last link, though it may take a little careful looking) .
For part of a good beginning overview, see:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Renaissance_for_PSYCHOLOGY_as_the_study_of_behavior--a_lot_of_that_but_JUST_that_per_se
For an example OF ALL THE BAD AND WORST PRACTICES (dualism/concrete-ism), see my review of "Abstract concepts and the suppression of arbitrary episodic context" in my SECOND Comment after that article. Here is a link to the article: Preprint Abstract concepts and the suppression of arbitrary episodic context
The above link is provided only for the purpose of giving you a bad example, an example of a study with bad practices (illustrating both the major ills I describe in the Question beginning THIS thread ) -- and the Comment (my second one) that tells you how and why.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy