Reply
Fri 16 Feb, 2007 03:34 pm
Abstract concept versus literal concept
When we throw a stone we develop a mental structure that is the concept of throwing a stone. When we run from a bear we develop a mental structure of the concept of running from a bear. These are literal (experiential, actual) concepts.
What is an abstract concept?
I think that a sentence or a paragraph might be good analogies for abstract concept. Think of words as being literal concepts and think of sentence or paragraph as being an abstract concept. The words are organized by the imagination to develop a sentence or paragraph. The coherence of the sentence or paragraph is dependent upon how well the imagination has formed it. A good sentence, like a good abstract concept, makes sense and will stand up to the empirical test of validity.
Cognitive science, as delineated in "Philosophy in the Flesh" by Lakoff and Johnson, presents a new paradigm for cognitive science. This new paradigm might be called the "conceptual metaphor" paradigm. The theory is that experiences form into concepts and some of these concepts are called "primary metaphors". These ?'primary metaphors' are often unconsciously mapped from the originating mental space onto another mental space that is a subjective concept, i.e. abstract concept.
Many years ago, before ?'self-service', it was common to pull into a gas station and when the attendant came to the car the motorist would say "Fillerup".
"More is up" is a common metaphor. I think of it every time I pour milk into a measuring cup when baking cornbread. The subjective judgment is quantity, the sensorimotor domain is vertical orientation, and the primary experience is the rise and fall of vertical levels as fluid is added or subtracted and objects are piled on top of or removed from a collection.
We can see (know is see) by this mechanism that we equate vertical motion in the spatial domain with quantity; we use the vertical domain to reason about quantity. We have a vast experience in vertical space domain reasoning and thus we derive this great experience to help us in reasoning about quantity; no doubt a very useful thing when first learning arithmetic. Teachers of mathematics, I suspect, depend upon this storehouse of knowledge to make abstract mathematical reasoning for children more comprehensible.
In a metaphor the source domain, ?'up', is mapped onto the target domain ?'more'. The neural structure of the sensorimotor domain, the primary metaphor, is mapped onto the subjective domain ?'more'. Reasoning about the vertical motion in the spatial domain is mapped onto reasoning about the quantity domain. This is a one-way movement; reasoning about quantity is not mapped onto spatial domain reasoning. The direction of inference indicates which the source is and which the target domain is.
Physical experiences of all kinds lead to conceptual metaphors from which perhaps hundreds of ?'primary metaphors', which are neural structures resulting from sensorimotor experiences, are created. These primary metaphors provide the ?'seed bed' for the judgments and subjective experiences in life. "Conceptual metaphor is pervasive in both thought and language." It is hard to think of a common subjective experience that is not conventionally conceptualized in terms of metaphor.
What?
A stone, long before you throw it, is a "mental structure" that is formed in the mind of the perciever.
Since you put "literal concept" up against abstract concepts I take that you mean concepts that are the oposite of abstract?
There is only one problem. ALL concepts are abstracts.
Btw,
I googled your nickname, cob, and a quick search revealed that you post your drivel in at least ten different forums, not counting A2K. After some checking I discovered that you recieve the same answers everywhere; basically that you are wrong, that you misuse words and definitions, that your claims fly in the face of established scientific fact... The list is endless.
Then why, I wonder, do you still continue to believe that you are right? You are worse than the most zealous theist I've ever come across in your denial of reality. It's really beyond comprehension.
Crracuz
It is a dirty job but some one must save the world from itself. I shall fight ignorance and evil, world wide, one post at a time.
Hah!
That is like Hitler saying "I will fight nazism".
Sorry about that, cob. I do not wish to hurt your feelings.
I am only saying that in the face of critisism you seem to turn a blind eye more often than not, and when confronted with the possibility that your truths are of non-science, and not really applickable anywhere you remain unfazed by it, posting the same thoughts over and over again as if they will become true just by sheer exposure.
Thing is that while ignorance is not preferred, it might still be the wiser choice over false knowledge and misinterpreted information.
Cyracuz wrote:Sorry about that, cob. I do not wish to hurt your feelings.
I am only saying that in the face of critisism you seem to turn a blind eye more often than not, and when confronted with the possibility that your truths are of non-science, and not really applickable anywhere you remain unfazed by it, posting the same thoughts over and over again as if they will become true just by sheer exposure.
Thing is that while ignorance is not preferred, it might still be the wiser choice over false knowledge and misinterpreted information.
More is learned through error than through apathy.
We have learned from infancy on, that the way to self-esteem is not to rock the boat. But it is boat rockers that we badly need. We must learn how to become confident in reason, and to become confident in our judgment, and to recognize that those who support the status quo will always oppose enlightenment and change.
The status quo requires no critical thought, and no confidence in reason, and no self-reliance. Those who are capable of such things must always recognize that most people are waiting to accept their role that others determine for them. Of course we must recognize that people hate change. The problem is to bring them along slowly so they do not recognize anything as change.
So you want to herd people into the knowledge that they should not allow themselves to be herded?
From where I'm standing, the true barrier and the thing maintaining the status quo is mainly fear.
We invent ways to battle enemies, never realizing that enemies are manifestations of fear. We can eliminate as many enemies we want, but our fears will always manifest in new ones. So until we can eliminate fear in our hearts things will never change.