ic ok. Because there is are neural correlates to both Allocentric (object-ot-object) and egocentric (self-to-object) processing in the brain, this for me validates both “objectivist” and “subjectivist” philosophers to some degree; because they are natural to humans. This does not imply that any particular philosophy or view is ACCURATE or PRECISE; however it does mean, to me, that ANY INQUIRY that pursues objective or subjective takes _is_ a valid pursuit, regardless of its success or failure at the task. That is: it is not wrong to pursue a SUBJECTIVE philosophy; something I have often had to defend through the years; but likewise, it is not wrong to pursue an OBJECTIVE philosophy – something that _I have_ fought against through the years. This DOES NOT MEAN that cognitive science is _the way_ either; but it would be very difficult to argue that these processes DON’T have neural correlates; something is being measured that correlates to certain subjective tasks; something is being measured that correlates to certain objective tasks so there is no reason to doubt that it is normal for humans to have both an egocentric and an allocentric perspective, albeit to different degrees, with both implicit and explicit aspects – some with very little implicit yet some development is still possible via explicit learning.

ic

Public
ok.
Because there is are neural correlates to both Allocentric (object-ot-object) and egocentric (self-to-object) processing in the brain, this for me validates both “objectivist” and “subjectivist” philosophers to some degree; because they are natural to humans.
This does not imply that any particular philosophy or view is ACCURATE or PRECISE; however it does mean, to me, that ANY INQUIRY that pursues objective or subjective takes _is_ a valid pursuit, regardless of its success or failure at the task. That is: it is not wrong to pursue a SUBJECTIVE philosophy; something I have often had to defend through the years; but likewise, it is not wrong to pursue an OBJECTIVE philosophy – something that _I have_ fought against through the years.
This DOES NOT MEAN that cognitive science is _the way_ either; but it would be very difficult to argue that these processes DON’T have neural correlates; something is being measured that correlates to certain subjective tasks; something is being measured that correlates to certain objective tasks so there is no reason to doubt that it is normal for humans to have both an egocentric and an allocentric perspective, albeit to different degrees, with both implicit and explicit aspects – some with very little implicit yet some development is still possible via explicit learning.

Attachments

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven + = 11

Leave a Reply