Recent comments

Browse archives

« January 2009  
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Cluster Map

Since 26 Oct 2006
Locations of visitors to this page

Legal

Creative Commons License
Legal Information
Steven R. Livingstone
2004-05-04

User login

A model of consciousness

Steven @ Thu, 2006-04-27 00:20

Time for another talkback, please feel free to debate.  For the past few weeks I have been writing a paper on evolutionary music psychology.  In my reading travels I happened across a very interesting theory of consciousness by Nicholas Humphrey (1992, A History of the mind).  He argues that social life is essentially about building and testing hypotheses.  That we explore our own mind and use it as the best model we have for the mind of another individual. 

This notion is in step with another popular theory, known as a Theory of Mind (ToM).  This model has been well tested during early childhood development.  A ToM argues that at around age four we develop the ability to see other people as individual mental beings; that they have beliefs, desires, emotions, and intentions, and whose actions and interactions can be interpreted and explained by taking account of these mental states.

Humphrey's model really struck a chord with me.  When I thought about it I realised that the way I consider the actions and intentions of other people is by placing myself in their position.  I use their knowledge and context about the event/object and think about the actions / thoughts I would take.  That is, I use my mind as the best model for hypothesis testing of other individuals.  

So what do you think?

Filed under: Philosophy | Talkback
 
Anonymous
Thu, 2006-05-04 04:19
 

I am often caught off guard by people who are incapable of applying deductive reasoning even though I know that they may constitute more than half of the entire population.

It seems (to me at least) that it's like what I consider to be the "universal" law of cause and effect. There can be no effect without a corresponding cause- "Why can't everybody understand that?"
"How can they possibly deny it?"
But they can, they do and they're incapable