Why Learn Something New?
I understand your frustration and confusion in trying to understand things about cognitive science. I felt much the same six months ago when I checked out “Philosophy in the Flesh†from the WCU library. I am not enrolled in that college but have a “Friends of the Library†card that for a fee of $25 a year I can borrow any book in the library.
Cognitive science as defined in this book is a revolutionary theory. It proposes ideas that are startling new and heretical to the established tradition. On every page I encountered concepts totally new to me. This book is 80% new stuff and as a result one must approach the matter differently from ones normal reading.
Our schooling prepares us to be good workers and avid consumers. Our schooling has not prepared us to seek new and revolutionary ideas. We must find our own means to move beyond our schooling if we are to take on such a drastic task.
I had studied the history of modern physics and so had an idea of what facing a world totally alien is like. The physicist facing a world inside the atom had to take a different point of view than they had ever faced before. The world inside the atom is alien to our world and the physicist had to deal with that major problem.
I think that one faces a similar, though not as drastic, a problem when dealing with CS as defined in this book. The first requirement is to decide whether the whole newly proposed paradigm is worth the effort of understanding. The best way, I think, to do this is check out the individuals who are working to introduce these revolutionary ideas. If they seem to be individuals worthy of trust then one can start the learning enterprise.
Of course, the domain of knowledge must be appealing to the reader or their curiosity will not support the hard work required.
The individuals working on this new theory are linguists, neural scientists, philosophers and others of high reputation. The effort began three decades ago and a great deal of empirical data has been collected to support their claims.
When I started the effort to learn this theory I decided that I could go no where unless I suspended disbelief until I got a handle on what is being proposed. I suspended disbelief and after six months of study I have a general idea of what is being proposed.
Asking questions and seeking answers to those questions is the foundation to understanding something so radically new. There are, it seems to me, two types of questions. Some questions are designed to facilitate learning and some questions are designed to inhibit learning. I suspect the questions designed to inhibit learning are often constructed by our unconscious because we do not want to undertake the vast effort required to understand the new ideas.
To study this book is to learn a new way to examine the world and the self. Our traditional philosophical views are not aligned with the views expressed by CS. To study this science will provide the knower with a new concept of reality. To understand any theory well we need something with which to compare it. Since we have never been taught a view contrary to the traditional view we have a very difficult time understanding the view we presently have. The very least a study of this theory will do is provide each of us something with which we can compare the present tradition. The best we will do is gain an early understanding of a newly accepted paradigm.
To study this CS theory is a no lose situation. At the very worst we will gain a better understanding of our present traditional views. This book will open a new world for the individual who has the curiosity to take on the adventure.
