Browsing through the various material available on mental models it’s hard not to observe the frequency with which relatively modern scholastic sources like Craik [46], Johnson-Laird [47] or Boulding [48] are considered as starting points in elaborating the ideas. One is tempted to believe there's nothing else before them. However, as soon one leaves the standard paths of cognitive sciences and adventure on the paths of philosophy or pseudosciences, one is surprised to find a rich of material attempting to describe how the mind perceives, represents und understands reality, respectively the phenomena we deal with.
One can agree that Craik’s work was a milestone within this context, as he considered that organisms and not only humans carry ‘small-scale model’ of external reality (aka mental models). However the term can be rooted back to antiquity if we consider Aristotle’s phantasmata (mental images) - perceptual states without matter used by intellect to think and associated with the imagination faculty [4] [5]. Similar interpretations appear in Augustinus [8], Avicenna [9] [10] [11], Maimonides [12], Aquinas [13] and much later St. Thomas [14] or Spinoza’s [16] works. Probably many of these sources have as direct or indirect source Aristotle’s work.
One can be entitled to suppose that there are also earlier similar attempts to explain how the mind reflects the reality, for example Plato’s 'images of beauty' [3] and model of resemblance [2]. Further early references are met in the works of Cicero [6] or Plotinus’ Enneads [7]. The available translations are maybe copies that haven’t kept the original or the meaning were adapted to modern times. References to the 'eye of the mind' or the 'thinking soul' are indicators for such attempts, typically in the context of treating imagination and perception themes.
One should not neglect the scriptures of the East, probably the earliest knowledge sources which attempted to describe metaphorically the inner workings of the mind. Patañjali 'Yoga Sūtras' [1] is maybe the best-known example of such sources, available in various translations with rich commentaries. Despite its character of pseudoscience and its interpretational complexity, the depth of the work could provide food for thought for the scientist and nonscientist altogether.
Hobbes [15], Berkely [17] [18], Hume [19], Reid [21] or Coleridge’s [22] [23] works seem to be more elaborated and have the advantage of eliminating the translator from the process, being to some degree easier to consume, despite the complex logical constructs of the literary style and the muddy character of the advanced ideas. In opposition with them, Kant [20] and later Nietzsche’s [25] works form the groundwork on which the modern German and European philosophy was built upon. Kant and Nietzsche’s schemas and schemata reflect the purposeful and structural character of such representations when associated with concepts.
Starting with Helmholtz’s 'Anschauungsbild' [24] (mental image) the term starts being use by scientists like Hertz [26] [31], Boltzmann [29] [35], Heisenberger [44] or Dirac [43] in respect to the modelling of phenomena. In parallel the works of Galton [27], Frege [28] [39], James [30], Peirce [32] [37] [38], Bergson [33], Wundt [34], Ribot [36], Wittgenstein [40], Freud [41], Piaget [42] or Sartre [45] represent a new wave into the development of cognitive sciences. It’s a really long list of precursors, probably incomplete, and ignoring them in the detriment of Craik, Johnson-Laird, Boulding, or any others, is an injustice made to the former.
Whether one talks about phantasmata, (mental) images, pictures, models or representations, schema, schemata, diagrams, conceptual schemes/models, or frames, they are all metaphors with similar meaning. It’s important to stress the fact that the metaphors used across the centuries and geographies reflect also the vocabulary available and the languages used to express them. The deeper one dives into the early ages’ cultural heritage, the more one discovers such metaphors. Unfortunately, without appropriate keys to decipher them and minds to explore them, the sources can become lost in the thread of time.
References (the quotes are available here):
[1] Yoga Sūtras of Patañjali, cca. 500 BC-400 CE
[2] Plato, “The Symposium", cca. 385–370 BC)
[3] Plato, “Timaeus”, 360 BC
[3] Plato, “Timaeus”, 360 BC
[4] Aristotle, "De Anima" III, cca. 350 BC
[5] Aristotle, “De Memoria et Reminiscentia” [On Memory and Recollection], 4th century BC
[6] Marcus Tullius Cicero, "De Natura Deorum" ["On the Nature of the Gods"], 45 BC
[7] Plotinus, “Enneads”, cca. 270 AD
[8] Aurelius Augustinus, "The City of God", early 400s
[9] Avicenna Latinus [Ibn Sina], "A Compendium on the Soul", cca. 996-997
[10] Avicenna Latinus [Ibn Sina], "Liber De anima", cca. 1014-1027
[11] Avicenna Latinus [Ibn Sina], "Pointer and Reminders", cca. 1030
[12] Moses Maimonides, “The Guide for the Perplexed”, 1190
[13] Saint Thomas Aquinas, “De Anima” III, cca. 1268
[14] John of St. Thomas, “Tractatus de signis”, 1632
[15] Thomas Hobbes, “Leviathan”, 1651
[16] Baruch Spinoza, "Ethics", 1677
[17] George Berkeley, "Principles of Human Knowledge", 1710
[18] George Berkeley, "Three Dialogues", 1713
[19] David Hume, “Treatise of Human Nature”, 1738
[20] Immanuel Kant," Critique of Pure Reason", 1781
[21] Thomas Reid, "Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man", 1785
[22] Samuel T Coleridge, "On the Principles of Genial Criticism", 1814
[23] Samuel T Coleridge, "The Statesman's Manual", 1816
[24] Hermann von Helmholtz, "Tonempfindungen" ["Sensations of Tone"], 1863
[25] Friedrich Nietzsche, "On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense", 1873
[26] Heinrich Hertz, "The Facts in Perception", 1878
[27] Francis Galton, “Mental imagery”, 1880
[28] Gottlob Frege, "The Foundations of Arithmetic", 1884
[29] Ludwig E Boltzmann, “On the Significance of Theories”, 1890
[30] William James, “The Principles of Psychology”, 1890
[31] Heinrich Hertz, “The Principles of Mechanics Presented in a New Form”, 1894
[32] Charles S Peirce, “Kinds of Reasoning”, cca. 1896
[33] Henri Bergson, "Matter and Memory", 1896
[34] Wilhelm M Wundt, “Outlines of Psychology”, 1897
[35] Ludwig Boltzmann, "On the development of the methods of theoretical physics", 1899
[36] Théodule-Armand Ribot, "Essay on the Creative Imagination", 1900
[37] Charles S Peirce, “Fallibility of Reasoning and the Feeling of Rationality”, cca. 1902
[38] Charles S Peirce, “On Existential Graphs, Euler's Diagrams, and Logical”, 1903
[39] Gottlob Frege, [in "On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic" 1971] cca. 1903-1909
[40] Ludwig Wittgenstein, “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus”, 1922
[41] Sigmund Freud, "The Ego And The Id", 1923
[42] Jean Piaget, "The Language and Thought of the Child", 1926
[43] Paul A M Dirac, "The Principles of Quantum Mechanics", 1930
[44] Werner K Heisenberg, "The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory", 1930
[45] Jean-Paul Sartre, “The Psychology of Imagination”, 1940)
[46] Kenneth Craik, “The Nature of Explanation”, 1943
[47] Kenneth E Boulding, "The Image: Knowledge in life and society", 1956
[48] Philip Johnson-Laird, "Mental models: Toward a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness", 1983
No comments:
Post a Comment