Think of what it would mean if there are: overall-important necessarily-seen (species-typical) behavioral achievements, and these are not only very important BUT also they would need explanation about how they “build up” and fully come to be (since they appear during ontogeny and aren't present at birth NOR are they inflexible, and thus clearly involve sub-capacities and learning). Wouldn't, then, the nature and bounds of these greater behavioral patterns help the study of all else?
I see a lot of researchers discussing the measurement of one important sub-aspect of cognitive functioning or another. Plus (of course), there is great concern about eliminating, balancing or measuring confounds or one might have [perhaps] irrelevant effects on the behavior indice of concern. Then there are other persons researching other likely major, important sub-aspects of pertinent cognition (for some important similar questions of interest).
What would makes things better: (1) to avoid the inevitable additional [(unnecessary)] confusions for/of such research (as mentioned above) ; (2) also help the challenges of judging the relative merits and importance of these and other seemingly relevant sub-aspects of cognition, independently investigated, AND (3) lessen the challenge of yet combining -- properly integrating/interpreting -- the various results. Don't all of these problems and challenges diminish, if indeed all the various particular sub-aspects investigated are likely to be functioning together to create a certain major species-typical behavioral pattern?
Wouldn't it help if you know some actual outer-bounding, “containing” achievement which DOES (must) occur (because it is species-typical) AND seems necessarily related to the particular abilities (aspects of cognition) you and others are investigating? The answer would be yes if the over-all achievement is such as described, i.e. actually “containing” (i.e. using) the aspects you all are investigating, to come into existence in the first place (AND, remember, it is known that this greater accomplishment occurs for-sure). You would have less of a question of what each individual sub-aspect of cognitive functioning would seem to need to have to accomplish, as shown in research; and you would no doubt have some idea of the possible relations (though hypotheses they be) between these and findings about other pertinent functioning aspects of cognitive behavior (found in others' research). You would have a better idea when you get a good result (a “top-notch” result, a would-be-necessary result) for a possible component to act THEN in some presumed role for a greater achievement. (Now the value, and some interpretation, need not stand on just the optimism or presentation of the findings of more-minor achievements shown/seen, one-by-one, in isolation.)
[ Also, helpful, is the necessary fact that the species-typical behavior pattern must have some beginning form to BE and to draw the use of memory capacities and learning to it: THIS TAKES A LITTLE AS A NEW PERCEPTUAL (perceptual/attentional) BIAS. I have outlined the likely nature of these in my "A Human Ethogram ... ". If indeed they come into existence in their nascent form in subtle (but researchable) ways, as just described, then we would see the way they change by involvement of these other things (learning and memory, which "build them up"), and it would be possible that it would help one see each involved capacity show some changes in ITS potential (e.g. change in the nature of "chunks" in working memory). ]
Article A Human Ethogram: Its Scientific Acceptability and Importanc...
P.S. to my answer, provided above:
As explained in the long paper, "A Human Ethogram ... " the results of the hypothesized perceptual (perceptual/attentional) shifts account for some of the main phenomenology the other major theories address. Thus, once the deficiencies in those theories (actual logical deficiencies -- serious errors of logic, I found) are revealed, then an alternative explanation is needed. I provide one that I believe is most NOT unlikely : the "perceptual shifts" -- not unlikely because it is patterned on the exact same classical ethology approach* used with several other mammals (and fishes, etc.). The reason only results the shifts could have are noted is that, though hypothesized, the actual perceptual (perceptual/attentional) shifts have not been found and that is because the eye-tracking technology needed to see the "shifts" is very new (and unfortunately, I am retired and not able to do this needed work). Clear, needed research could find these perceptual shifts, that guide the development of levels of abstraction in representation (and involve many of the aspects of memory and cognition thought most important).
FOOTNOTE
* Perceptual biases are also not unlikely because they conform to the what is often proposed as the evolutionary fore-runner of our abstract categorization abilities: the LIKELY social patterns observed by our common evolutionary ancestor (with most of the concept patterns quite possibly just "content-free-up" versions of the social understandings needed by ape-like folks). ALSO, it is not an unlikely "scenario" (that is, the perceptual biases) because of the one-way influence seen/found between basic innate perception and cognition (they influencing cognitive processes, but not the other way around).
Maybe it's beyond "not unlikely": In my mind, some perceptual (perceptual/attentional) biases are about the only likely type of innate guidance for cognition during ontogeny or, at least, later in ontogeny. It seems to me, your only choices are to believe that adult humans reliably 'engineer' children into adulthood (which frankly is ridiculous) OR conceive of the children guiding the guiders (which also seems preposterous -- because THAT is much the same ridiculous thing!).
[ I suggest you see the other Questions (and Answers) under this Project.
This involves clicking the Questions link under the Project each time (after reading each Q and A) to return to the list and thus be able to go and see the next question. ]
ALSO: see: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Have_you_seen_my_papers_yet_seen_the_relevance_of_them (posted in "Theory of representational mechanism" Project)
And, perhaps also see: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_could_be_the_identifiable-and-definable_components_of_Operational_AI (posted under "Operational System of Artificial Intelligence" Project)
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology