Cognitive Psychology and Its Application to Brain, Mind, and Beliefs of a Person - Essay Example

Running Head: Be Ye Transformed “Be Ye Transformed!” Cognitive Psychology and Its Application to Brain, Mind, and Beliefs. Name School From the moment when Plato presented the separateness of mind and matter, psychology was born. It was conceived and developed in the womb of Greek philosophy, religion, and mythology. Through the millennia many of the world’s great minds nurtured and helped it grow, from Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Anselm to Martin Luther, Galileo, and Descartes. Then at long last, psychology was identified as a separate scientific discipline through the dedicated studies and brilliant efforts of several persons, the most noteworthy being Gustav Fechner, Wilhelm Wundt, and William James. It is from this point that Cognitive Psychology came into being. In 1879 a laboratory opened at the University of Leipzig in which, for the first time, scientific methods were being used to study human behavior and its antecedent, the origins of thought in human beings. This was the laboratory of Wilhelm Wundt. However, even before Wundt began his experimental studies, others were setting the stage for applying scientific methods to thought processes, most notablely Gustav Fechner. Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801-1887) Gustav Fechner was a physician who early in his career suffered (while doing research) a painful injury to his eyes which left him temporarily blind and changed the direction of his studies and research into the realm of thought and perception. In 1848 his first work in this area was published, Nanna, oder Über das Seelenleben der Pflanzen. In Nanna, and in his subsequent work, Zend-Avesta (1851), Fechner proposed a mind/body view that, while it retained some dualism of mind and body, proposed and developed the unity of mind and body working together for processes such as thought and perception to occur. 1 In his Elemente de Psychophysik (1860), he articulated for the first time a science of the relationship between physical and mental phenomena in which he attempted to demonstrate that mind and matter are different means of conception of the same reality.2 And Fechner also had a contemporary Von Helmholtz who along with him was laying the foundations for what would eventually become cognitive psychology. Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz (1821-1894) Another Prussian physician, Hermann von Helmholtz, a contemporary of Fechner, was also investigating the relationship between the physical and the mental. However, he was specifically focusing on the process of perception. From 1856 to 1866, his Handbuch der physiologischen Optik was published in several parts. His theory of perception was that an automatic and unconscious process of sensation and a conscious, logical process of inference of external characteristics are both needed for perceptions to occur.3 His theory was one of the contributing factors for the experimental methodology of Francis Donders. Franciscus Cornelis Donders (1818-1889) Francis Donders was also a physician, born and educated in the Netherlands. He, similar to his contemporaries, focused on research and development in the arena of psychophysics. His use of the reaction-time method to measure the time taken by mental processes had a major impact on the work of his contemporaries. As a result, his reaction-time methods were used as a method of choice in the early experimental laboratory of Wilhelm Wundt. Wilhelm Max Wundt (1832-1920) Experimental psychology, birthed by Gustav Fechner, and nurtured by Hermann Helmholtz and Francis Donders, was to be adopted and raised by Wilhelm Wundt. Wundt, also a physician, was Helmholtz’s research assistant beginning in 1858. During this time, Wundt began the study of sense perception that led to a series of publications collected in 1862, as his Beiträge zur Theorie der Sinneswahrnehmung. The Beiträge consisted of six previously published articles on sensory perception in which Wundt constructed a basic theory of the perception of space, analyzed the function of sensations arising from visual effects and movements, reported results of eye experiments and introduced the argument that consciousness always consists of a single unconsciously integrated perception. Wundt’s methodological introduction to the Beiträge, in all reality is the beginning and foundation of experimental psychology. Rejecting a metaphysical explanation, Wundt outlined the direct study of consciousness through the use of scientific, historical, and experimental methods, with a clear emphasis on the experimental. He postulated that this was the avenue by which it would be possible to achieve a needed understanding of the "complex products of the unconscious mind" 4 as conscious processes. While his use of a process known as introspection is no longer in use, it helped lay the groundwork for future experimental methods. Titchener, one of his many and probably most well-known students used Wundt’s process of “introspection” to create the first major methodology in psychology known as structuralism. Edward B. Titchener (1867-1927) Titchener was an Englishman who studied with Wundt before coming to the United States and setting up a psychology laboratory at Cornell University where he was professor of psychology. He would become the person associated with creating the school of thought in psychology known as “structuralism,” in which the hypothesis was that consciousness could be broken down into the smaller and more basic parts of sensations and perceptions.5 Structuralism is respected as the ancestor of scientific research in psychology, but its methods are no longer in use. While structuralism is notable for its emphasis on scientific research, with the passing of time its methodology was found to be too subjective and by the time of Titchener’s death in 1927 other methodologies and schools of thought were emerging, and structuralism quickly was retired into the annals of psychological history. One of those schools of thought was what came to be called “functionalism” in psychology, and William James is given the credit as the father of this school of thought. William James (1842-1910) Similar to the other influential founders and builders of cognitive psychology, William James was a medical doctor. Born in New York City and trained at Harvard, due to ill health, James found himself traveling in Germany in 1867 and 1868 in search of treatment. In that year and a half, James discovered that his heart and mind were more in philosophy and psychology, and consequently he became acquainted with the work of Herman Helmholtz and Wilhelm Wundt during that time. When he returned to the United States, he began to spend time in philosophical discussions with the esteemed mathematician and philosopher Chauncey Wright and renowned author and clergyman Oliver Wendell Holmes. Eventually their meeting became a formal discussion group known as the Metaphysical Club.6 It was in these discussions that “functionalism” in psychology took shape. James was not much interested in the experimental work of the structuralists. His method was direct observation of human behavior. And his focus was more on the process of thought than on its physiological construct. His work laid the foundation for the theory of cognitive development constructed by the pioneer of child psychology and educational theory, Jean Piaget. Jean Piaget (1896-1980) Jean Piaget was a Swiss biologist who became interested in child development through his biological work with water snails. Often children would help him collect them and help him set them up for experiments. As he observed the children, Piaget became more interested in their development and so abandoned his marine biology work in favor of what would become the basis of child psychology. His views of how children’s minds work used functionalism as its jumping off place in adding more depth and understanding to cognitive psychology as well as in laying the ground work for developmental and educational theory7 in the rapidly evolving science of psychology and specifically, cognitive psychology. After the Second World War cognitive psychology began to find its own voice in response to the behavioral psychology of B.F. Skinner. The behaviorist school of thought began to take hold and flourish for nearly two decades. However, those who responded critically to behaviorism would give cognitive psychology even more depth and maturity and its eventual rise to dominance in the science of psychology today. Two of the first to give voice to cognitivism were Lawrence Kohlberg and Noam Chomsky. Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) Lawrence Kohlberg was trained at and served as psychology professor at the University of Chicago and Harvard University. Kohlberg took up Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and used it to create a new center of thought in psychology, that of moral development. To better understand the process of the development of moral reasoning in persons, Kohlberg created moral dilemmas and observed the reactions to them in persons from children to adults. 8 For Kohlberg ethical actions and behavior are the results of the moral development of persons from earliest childhood. In addition to Kohlberg, the other person to give a voice to cognitive psychology was Avram Noam Chomsky. Avram Noam Chomsky (b. 1928) About the time Piaget was beginning his work in this field, Avram Noam Chomsky was born. Noam Chomsky is primarily a linguist but also respected as a philosopher and professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He challenged the behaviorist approach in a review of Skinner’s “Verbal Behavior” in 1959.9 He constructed a theory of “universal grammar” that greatly impacted the understanding of how language is learned by children and was the catalyst for a formal debate with Piaget in 1975.10 Chomsky focused on the development specifically of syntax structure in human beings, in other words, how persons bring together words and phrases and form them into decipherable and meaningful speech. His focus on psycholinguistics was influential in the work of Jerry Fodor whose “Modularity of Mind” set the tone for bringing cognitive psychology into the twenty-first century. Jerry Alan Fodor (b. 1935) Jerry Fodor is a philosopher and cognitive scientist who continues to hold a professorship at Rutgers University. Fodor presented his cognitive thesis as a “language of thought” in which various parts of the human mind such as beliefs, desires, and emotions, which he conceptualized as “modules”,11 communicate thought to the individual person. Because, similar to James, Fodor’s work is focused on the process by which thought occurs, he is a functionalist, but with a “twist” – that twist being that the mental processes by which thought occurs are compilations of the syntax of the language of thought. Fodor further posited that the mental state of a person is the relationship between that person and his/her mental representations of the environment.12 The relational nature of Fodor’s functionalism turned cognitive psychology from its birth and childhood in the experimental period, structuralism, and early functionalism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and its adolescence in behaviorism in the mid-twentieth century into its adulthood now in the twenty-first century. Experimental Psychology With this overview of the birth, growth, and development of cognitive psychology, its theories, methodologies, and goals begin to emerge from its history. From its earliest inception in the minds of Fechner and Helmholtz to the psychological laboratory of Wilhelm Wundt, it is clear that cognitive psychology was born out of the application of scientific methods to human mental processes and beliefs. For Wundt, consciousness had elemental composition in the same manner that matter had elemental composition. For example, “feelings” and “sensations” were two elements of consciousness. Wundt’s main experimental focus was on the element of sensation and how it compounds to form ideas which he postulated as “mental images.” 13 Feelings, thoughts and will were too subjective to be objects of sensory perception and thus not subjected to his experimental work in the laboratory. However, they were all defined by him as elements of consciousness and his student Tichener conceptualized them into smaller parts of consciousness to objectify them enough to apply introspective methods to their further study. Structuralism Tichener was the first to apply structuralism, an already existing discipline in other sciences to Wundt’s experimental work in psychology. He organized the mind into classifications of components that made up each element of the mind.14 For example, the element of feelings would have components such as empathy, sadness, and joy under its classification. His work would be the forerunner of much of Fodor’s modularity work and in its own time ushered in William James and “functionalism.” Functionalism Although he did little in the way of experimental work, William James expanded the work of Wundt to include not only visual images but verbal images which become thoughts, which are then catalysts for action. His focus on the process of thought became “functionalism” which forms the base of today’s cognitive psychology. His rationalist methodology - beginning with stateable abstract principles, then combining them with the facts of sensation leading to hypotheses, which finally produce logically drawn inferences15 - still influences the study of the process of thought to this day. Constructivism and Developmental Stages In his observations of children, Piaget then took this baton and “ran with it.” His particular insight in understanding cognitive psychology was the role of child growth and development and the child’s corresponding increasing understanding of the world around him/her and using that understanding to live and thrive. He proposed that the process of thought does not develop in a smooth evenly measured manner, but instead has points constructed one from the other and on top of the other in which it transitions into new understanding and capability; and those get used and developed for a period of years before the next point of transition occurs.16 Piaget’s work sparked Kohlberg to apply similar principles to moral development. Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, which form the basis for ethics and ethical behavior, has six developmental stages, grouped into three levels; pre-conventional, conventional and post conventional classifications. 17In his theory, an individual must move from one stage to the other in order because each new stage is built of the material of the one behind it. His theory assumes an inherent human capacity for reasoning and apprehending their environment. Moral reasoning is different than its moral conclusions and Kohlberg named his method of examining moral reasoning “formalism”18 to separate the “form” of reasoning from its eventual conclusions. Psycholinguistics Like Kohlberg, Chomsky held that certain human processes are inherent or innate, and in particular the development of language. The development of a language is a result of the impact of external life experience with the inner innate processes that trigger language development.19 “Modularity” is a key characteristic of this process of linguistic development. The mind is interactive, its differing parts communicating with each other with the amount and duration determined by the external environment. Modularity of Mind This theory also subscribes to the theory of “nativism” that many processes and characteristics of the mind are inherent in being human. Fodor argued that one of those inherent qualities is the development of a “language of thought” 20in which various parts of the mind, “modules” communicate with one another to form the “syntax” in the language of thought. This is a relational language, maintaining the communication between the person, their mental representations, and the resulting thought contents of the interactions of mental representations with one another.21 This relational thought language provides the connective tissue for the emerging science of neurotheology. Neurotheology The connection lies in the “language of thought” giving form, shape and direction to human experiences that transcend time and space. In Bulkeley’s The Wondering Brain, he defines wonder as an experience that “exceeds ordinary language”22 as it also leads to changing the perspective and understanding of the person experiencing it. Whether it is through a sensory event or a new awareness outside the sensory, the human experience of wonder is an excellent example of how Cognitive Psychology can both inform and give further clarity to neurotheology. For wonder at its highest point of individual impact is a theological experience that imparts its new awareness through cognitive processes. Another realm of the mind in which the two disciplines work together is in the unique ability humans have to recognize and identify the intentions of others. Scholars in the field of cognitive psychology refer to it as “mind-reading.”23 Although a person may occasionally be mistaken about the motives, feelings and intentions of the other person, the majority of the time an individual correctly “reads” the other person. And this is not on the basis of elaborate mental processing, but in simple and often instantaneous observation that transcends the sensory. Some researchers have posited that Fodor’s modularity can be applied to social consciousness as well to give further depth and understanding to the process of “mind-reading.” Self-representations also transcend the sensory and experiential. They have both the experiential and the spiritual as their sources. However, persons often prefer to change the experiential rather than the transcendent part of themselves in response to stress. Some scholars have posited that personal control is a foundational self-representation that determines other mental processes related to the self.24 Both cognitive and theological understandings are needed to parse this strong and often compulsive need for control within human beings. Even delusional thinking can be informed and addressed more appropriately jointly in neurotheology. The psycholanalytic approach has for years seen delusions as the result of an aberrant past, the result of life experience. However, within neurotheology it is much more hopeful to understand delusions as disorders of belief about self and others that thus affect one’s motivation to stay in reality and live thereby.25 Even when they are the result of an aberrant past, there is hope for bringing delusions back into conformity with reality when both the experiential and the belief system which transcend it are addressed. In Smith’s article, what he termed “interactivism” is the thesis that both the external experiential sensory representations and the internal transcendant representations must interact in dialogue for psychology to make progress.26 For example in Bering’s article he used the example of Hurricane Katrina and the varying responses of people whose lives it impacted.27 For some it was the judgment of God on their lifestyle, for others it was a “wake-up call” to change, for others it was the consequences of human error in the building and expansion of New Orleans. The uniting of the experiential and the theological in neurotheology can provide an interpretation that honors the beliefs of all with the experiences of all – that a person’s lifestyle may need to change and at the same time learn from the experiential errors committed that contributed to the massive destruction imparted by Hurricane Katrina. The interaction of the cognitive and spiritual with the experiential the very movement of life. Paul the apostle in his letter to the Romans wrote “Be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God...” (Romans 12:2)28 Perhaps the key to relationship with that which is beyond the human lies in the transformation which occurs in uniting both experience and its resulting thought processes (the “world”) with its theological and spiritual constructs (mind “renewal”) and thus discover a higher plane (the “will of God”) for human thought and life. References Barrett, Justin L. (2007) “Is the Spell Really Broken? Bio-psychological Explanations of Religion and Theistic Belief” Theology and Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, (pp. 58-72) Bering, Jesse M. (2006) “The Cognitive Psychology of Belief in the Supernatural” American Scientist, Volume 94, No. 3(pp. 142-149) Bjork, Jeffrey B. (1995) “A Self-Centered Perspective on McIntosh’s Religious Schema.” The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, Vol. 5, No. 1 (pp. 23-29) Bulkeley, Kelly. (2005) The Wondering Brain: Thinking about Religion with and beyond Cognitive Neuroscience. New York: Routledge. Burdein, Inna, Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles. (2006) “Experiments of the Automaticity of Political Beliefs and Attitudes. Political Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 3, (pp. 359-371). Cervone, Daniel. (2004) “The Architecture of Personality.” Psychological Review, Vol. 111, No. 1, (pp. 183-204) Chomsky, Noam. (1959) "A Review of B. F. Skinners Verbal Behavior.” Language, Vol. 35, No. 1, 26-58. Chomsky, Noam. (2006). Language and Mind, Third Edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Coltheart, Max. (2005). “Delusional Belief.” Australian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 57, No. 2, (pp. 72-76). Currie, Gregory and Sterelny, Kim. (2000) “How to Think About the Modularity of Mind- Reading.” The Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 50, No. 199, (pp 1-16). Fechner, Gustav. (1889) Elemente der Psychophysik 2nd edition: Leipzig: Breitkopf and Hartel. Fechner, Gustav. (1903) Nanna oder über das Seelenleben der Pflanzen 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fechner, Gustav. (1906) Zend-Avesta oder über die Dinge des Himmels und des Jenseits. 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fodor, Jerry. (1975) The Language of Thought, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Holy Bible. (1990) New Revised Standard Version. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers James, William. (1950). The Principles of Psychology, Volume 1. Mineola, New York: Courier Dover Publications. James, William. (1994). The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. New York: Random House, Inc. Kahl, Russell, ed. (1971). Selected Writings of Hermann von Helmholtz. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press. Kohlberg, Lawrence (1981). Essays on Moral Development, Vol. I: The Philosophy of Moral Development. New York: Harper & Row. MacCorquodale, Kenneth. (1970). “On Chomsky’s Review of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior.” Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, volume 13, (pp. 83–99). McKay, Ryan, Langdon, Robyn, and Coltheart, Max. (2005) “’Sleights of Mind:’ Delusions, Defenses and Self-Deception.” Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Vol. 10 No. 4, (pp. 305- 326). Piaget, Jean and Chomsky, Noam. (1980). Language and Learning: The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1980) Piaget, Jean. (1999). The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Routledge. Smith, Leslie. (2003). “Internality of Mental Representation.” Consciousness and Emotion. Vol. 4, No.3. (pp.307-325). Thomas, J.T., Nigel. (2007). Mental Imagery: Founders of Experimental Psychology, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mental- imagery/founders-experimental-psychology.html Titchener, Edward, B. (1909) A Textbook of Psychology. New York: Macmillan. Van Elk, Michiel. (2007) “Cognitive Science Meets the Design Plan.”South African Journal Of Philosophy, Vol. 26, No. 3, (pp.319-329) Van Wagner, Kendra. (2008) Your Guide to Psychology. http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/f/cogpsych.htm Wundt, Wilhelm. (1907). Lectures on Human and Animal Psychology. (J.E. Creighton and E. B. Titchener, Trans.). New York: Macmillan. (Second edition published in 1897). Wundt, Wilhelm. (1897). Outlines of Psychology. (Charles Hubbard Judd, Trans.) Engelmann, 1897 (original work published in 1896) Read More