Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,386 Year: 3,643/9,624 Month: 514/974 Week: 127/276 Day: 1/23 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intuitive Cognition
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 369 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 1 of 6 (649220)
01-21-2012 2:57 PM


Here is an interesting study that indicates that overcoming peoples intuitive beliefs is more difficult than just teaching the facts.
quote:
Though additional components of the model remain to be tested, results reported here indicate that a product of intuitive cognitions, FOC (feelings of certainty), strongly moderates acceptance of evolution. This finding is both encouraging and sobering. On one hand, we have identified a previously unexamined factor that seems strongly predictive of level of acceptance of evolution. On the other hand, we seem to have uncovered a factor that represents a category of cognitions, intuitive cognitions, for which we have little to guide us in designing educational interventions.
On a side note, I thought that MSNBC's report on the study was both telling and ironic.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2012 3:09 PM Dogmafood has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 2 of 6 (649222)
01-21-2012 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dogmafood
01-21-2012 2:57 PM


Hi Dogmafood
... results reported here indicate that a product of intuitive cognitions, FOC (feelings of certainty), strongly moderates acceptance of evolution. ...
and also comes into play in the political arena, where FOC are treated as more important than issues or facts?
Enjoy
ps -- can anyone say "cognitive dissonance"?
Edited by Zen Deist, :

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dogmafood, posted 01-21-2012 2:57 PM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dogmafood, posted 01-21-2012 3:16 PM RAZD has replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 369 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 3 of 6 (649223)
01-21-2012 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by RAZD
01-21-2012 3:09 PM


It would seem that our instinct is to be only partially rational

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2012 3:09 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 01-21-2012 3:45 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2012 8:19 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 184 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 4 of 6 (649227)
01-21-2012 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dogmafood
01-21-2012 3:16 PM


Most of our thinking is irrational. And it is a good thing, too. Depressed people are more accurate in predicting outcomes than non-depressed people (who tend to predict more positive outcomes).
It seems that moderately depressed people are inherently more realistic than the non-morbid population. Most people are irrationally optimistic.
Humans are constantly modelling the future but it is through the lens of the individual's core beliefs or schemata.
These can be incredibly resistant to change and make my job a lot harder .
People can a do change their core beliefs and schemata but normally it requires some form of therapeutic input.
Edited by Larni, : Clarity of thought.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dogmafood, posted 01-21-2012 3:16 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 01-21-2012 8:16 PM Larni has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 5 of 6 (649256)
01-21-2012 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Larni
01-21-2012 3:45 PM


Hi Larni,
Most of our thinking is irrational. And it is a good thing, too. Depressed people are more accurate in predicting outcomes than non-depressed people (who tend to predict more positive outcomes).
That's a depressing thought. Or does it indicate that the positive outcome of the GOP primaries are overblown?
These can be incredibly resistant to change and make my job a lot harder .
People can a do change their core beliefs and schemata but normally it requires some form of therapeutic input.
And like the joke about the number of psychologists it takes to change a lightbulb (1 but) the bulbs have to want to change.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 01-21-2012 3:45 PM Larni has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 6 (649257)
01-21-2012 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dogmafood
01-21-2012 3:16 PM


Hi again Dogmafood
It would seem that our instinct is to be only partially rational
No matter how much we try to hide it behind a facade of rationality, the instinct seems to be to pick a course of action\argument (based on personal worldview) and then justify it.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dogmafood, posted 01-21-2012 3:16 PM Dogmafood has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024