Posted by: Xhyra Graf | 30 May 2010

Nature of Insight

The Nature of Insight, Sternberg & Davidson, Editors © 1996 The MIT Press | Epilogue – Schooler et al.Found some of this applicable/interesting.

  • Important to make a distinction between the Insight Event and explanations of insight problems [or different avenues to the Insight Event]
    • I definitely agree
  • Warmth Rating Operationalization – Metcalf
  • p563: If Insight occurs in a situation that the [explanatory] theory does not predict, we should modify the theory, notthe definition of the event, otherwise the theory will never be falsifiable.
    • As a real longshot of analogy [I guess it just reminded me], I need to go back to the CPREA and make sure I re-reference [actually properly spell out — if Sean may be taken to represent the common obtuse Philosopher] my specific meaning of Soul/Psyche/Consciousness, i.e what makes us human and stick to it.
  • Combining the visual and spatial metaphors
    • as in the artwork: visual cues of my own private language [ Wittgenstein 😛 ] and size choices giving body [embodied] reference.

____________

Causes of Impasses

  • Note: I am at or rather have been at an impasse because I have been in the wrong ‘place/crowd’ to give me the appropriate verbal/linguistic cues.  Which Chalmers provided with the Cosmoscope [though there is a largely visual portion of thinking about that] plus the concept of nonduality [which for f**k’s sake! it seems that I didn’t hear properly until after Hong Kong] — Zombie artists attack! As in not even being able to understand my own stuff when preparing to go to Hong Kong.
  • Recognition Failure
  • Overemphasis of Irrelevant Cues [yeah…]
    • p566-7: Isaak and Just – “Insight problems often contain information that lead[s] subjects to incorrectly accept additional operator constraints not mandated by the problem.”  Although this is more appropriate to the following section – my not even wantingto include Kant in my paper because I just couldn’t deal with the blank stares or f**ked up zero-sum interpretations anymore was a constraint.
    • Note to Greene’s idea that some creative people are afraid to pursue some avenues for fear of corrupting the “intuitive” process. In the Intro – find the actual words.
    • Let’s add to this my propensity to get fixated [probably because of the actual physicalirritation I feel] by the adversarial view – this may be what’s wrong with Analytic Philosophy [the ‘necessary’ dialectic be damned-they never seem to be able to get to synthesis].
      • So… I need to adopt the attitude of  “I don’t have time to fight” and only pay attention to arguments that are actually relevant, not dogmatically fricking irritating.
  • Underemphasis of Relevant Cues
  • Searching the Wrong Space
    • See previous note re: NonDual Cosmoscope [like that phrasing 🙂 ] to avoid being anymore nasty than I already have been here, lmao.

Will continue How Impasses are Overcome tomorrow… sleepy

Advertisements

Responses

  1. […] yeah, see Nature of Insight Epilogue on the importance of making a distinction between the Insight Event and the processes leading up […]


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: