I'm a layman of cognitive science, while I'm interested in it as well as Indrajeet's this question. My superficial understanding is that 'Thinking" is just a kind of activity of our human being, while "Cognition" represents abstract knowledge gained through a process of "thinking" and/or learning.

Thanks Gary and Bin for your interest in the conversation.

You're welcome Indrajeet and thank you for your question. By the way, I wonder the relationships among "Cognition", "thinking","decision making" and "problem solving". Hopefully I could learn something about that from others' later responses.

I like Gary's response. It's striking clear.

Gary is right - cognition can be done automatic, without "thinking". And thinking is usually connected to consciousness, effort and sequential processing. I`d say that cognition is Type 1 processing while thinking is Type 2 processing. Of course I explain folk understanding of thinking and cognition. In dual-process theory thinking is split into automatic and reflexive thinking. I`d recommend to read any text of Jonathan Evans or Keith Stanovich.

Thanks Michal......But I am confused

"Cognition can be done automatic, without "thinking". And thinking is usually connected to consciousness"

does not it mean that thinking is not Cognition? but thinking is involved in problem solving, decision making etc. and many believes that thinking, problem solving , decision making are the subset of cognition.

"I`d say that cognition is Type 1 processing while thinking is Type 2 processing."

Kahneman in his book Thinking fast and slow considers both Type 1 and Type 2 processes thinking, former is fast thinking and latter is slow.

It depends on your perspective and philosophical commitments. Take Charles Sanders Peirce for example, he thinks that both these concepts are abstractions. We have behaviors and habits, and in order to explain the complexity of those we are constructing these (thinking and cognition) fictions. They are useful in that sense. Behaviorists would also tell you something similar.

From the perspective of contemporary cognitive science and related domains, cognition is more general. Meaning that it includes thinking but not limited to it. It is a collection of a wide set of phenomena like perception, action, emotions, behaviors, memory, senses, thinking, planning, reasoning, problem solving etc.

One of the main problems is that nobody is really sure how to connect all these phenomena in a meaningful way. What is the relation between memory and perception, or reasoning and action...

Thank you for sharing your thoughts

Hi I agree with Tunc Guven Kaya. However I feel we can also refine the differences a little further by looking at the etymology of the words.

Cognition comes from the Latin cognitionem meaning "a getting to know, acquaintance, knowledge"https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=cognition

Thinking on the other hand means the use of the mind to produce thoughts https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thinking

Thought comes from the Old English to conceive of in the mind (Harper, Douglas. "Etymology of Thought". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved 2009-05-22).

Summing this up, it seems thoughts need not mean anything - we can use our mind to produce nonsense thoughts if we want to -however generaly thinking it associated with our ability to reason - Cognition, on the other hand is always linked with knowledge - this can include knowledge arrived at through thinking but need not do so.

In the theory of the Six main levels of Consciousness I work with and research. the first level is to do with the thinking mind which is associated with the brain, where as the third level is to do with feeling associated with the mind of the heart. This gives rise to intuition - another way of knowing. It is only when we communicate that knowing, that we actually use thoughts. It seems cognition can also encompass and describe intuitive knowledge or knowing.

Warm regards Tina

"Cognition" requires "thinking"; "thinking" does not require "cognition".

Hi Dwight - I would like to qualify your reply:

Cognition can embrace thinking but it can also embrace other ways of knowing; thinking does not necessarily lead to cognition.

Dear Tina,

Thank you for your amplification of my pithy distinction between "cognition" and "thinking".

The Oxford dictionary defines "cognition" as "the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses". I think there always is a final step or action of thought (thinking) by which we formally become "cognizant" of whatever was the stimulus or process that led to the cognition. Cognition thus needs at least one act of thought.

You reiterate my second statement: we can think thoughts without being cognizant of anything.

Dear Dwight Hoxie

Thanks for claryfying further - I went into etymology as that gives us the root of the word - you have gone into a modern dictionary - which gives us the modern meaning.

My work and research also involves how intuition (linked to the Female Principle and the mind of the heart) has been depreciated by society (over 2,000 years). This way of knowing by passes the rational thinking mind and can arrive for example in symbols, images and/or activation of different areas in the body (I have a paper on this that is presented to a journal - waiting acceptance)

So either we have to not include this way of knowing (heart-based intuition) in the definition of cognition, or we have to amplify the definition of the Oxford dictionary and return to the original etymological meaning. This is so interesting. From my research it is a much bigger problem than most scientists in the field realise.

I congratualte Indrajeet Indrajeet on his question.

Warm regards Tina

Dear Tina,

Thank you for the additional information regarding your work. Now I am "cognizant" of what you and can give it further "thought".

Notice that "cognition" is a noun with no corresponding verb. The verb "cognize" is associated with the noun "cognizance" which is altogether different from "cognition", "Cognition" thus must be a product or result of some action; it is not an action in itself. With the noun "thought" we have the verb "to think". How do we arrive at "cognition" ? Is "cognition" not a mental state or state of mind that entails awareness. We become "cognizant" of something. Hence, I submit that the act of "cognition" requires the production of a "thought" that, in turn, is produced by "thinking". Thus "cognition" requires "thinking". There is no way to arrive at a state of "cognition" without thinking a thought.

Ah, words and their meanings are such lovely playthings!

Cheers!

Dwight

Dear Dwight Hoxie

Notice that "cognition" is a noun with no corresponding verb

That is not correct dear friend - the verb "cogitate" comes from the same stem and it means to meditate deeply - it can be used in the transient and transient form - in deep mediation inspirational solutions arrive but not via the thinking mind, but either above the mind or below the mind via the mind of the heart. Both give rise to intuitive knowing. It is only if we communicate these insights to others that we use words -

Some more things for you to "cogitate"on .....

With a smile - Tina

Dear Tina,

Ah my dear, but no. The noun corresponding to the verb "cogitate" is "cogitation" not "cognition". "Cognition" is a "state of being aware of something" whereas "cogitation" is, as you point out, is a "state of thinking deeply about something". Both entail mental processes that are distinctly different although both contain the same root "cog". I am "cognizant" of your work but currently I am not (but perhaps I should!) "cogitating" on it.

So I continue to maintain that "cognition" is a state of being that has no verb by which to arrive at such state except by the mental process of "thought" arrived at by "thinking".

I don't want to be a problem but I delight in exploring the intricacies of language even if I am way off the mark.

Dwight

Dear Dwight Hoxie

Yes I like playing with words as well, so back to cognition and its roots

History and Etymology for cognition

Middle English cognicioun "comprehension, ability to comprehend," borrowed from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French cognicion "knowledge, jurisdiction," borrowed from Latin cognitiōn-, cognitiō "act of getting to know, comprehension, investigation," from cogni-, variant stem of cognōscere "to get to know, acquire knowledge of, become acquainted with, investigate" (from co- CO- + gnōscere, nōscere"to get to know," inchoative derivative from Indo-European *ǵneh3-, *ǵṇh3- "to know, recognize") + -tiōn-, -tiō, suffix of action nouns —

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cognition

As Latin languages, Spanish of course has a verb (and also French). No wonder the English (and most scientists in the filed of Consciousness are English speaking) have problems with understanding consciousness and cognition if they restrict themselves to the thinking mind - this has given rise to the idea that the brain gives rise consciousness -- they do not realise this is only the tip of the iceberg!!! There are many other ways of obtaining knowledge and being guided by our deeper Self.

In the end this deserves a paper on the subject -

Warm regards Tina

Dear Tina,

Another nit picky point is that the “cog” in “cognition” is pronounced with a hard “g” while that in “cogitate” is soft.

Cognition is the wide sea of science. Thinking is the property of human mind to learn any thing in life including understanding science.

https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/10/14/hannah-arendt-human-condition-art-science/