>what i have been saying all along is that maybe we have defined "logic" to
>narrowly.
Daniel, I don't want to get into a quarrel about semantics. But since
language, consciousness and anything to do with the human mind and brain
are to say the least complex matters, it might be worth sharpening your
tools. "Logic" is not a synonym for "mental processes", and is rather
misleading.
>About neurology i am definitely against current theories of cognitive
>science and all forms of reductionism of mental states into brain activity
>so I really doubt i would get much out of reading neurology.
I too am deeply disturbed by all kinds of biological determinism and
reductionism. The description of all kinds of mental activity as "logic"
strikes me as reductionism, which is why I don't like it.
I have recently read a very interesting book by the neurologist Antonio
Damasio, The Feeling of What Happens, which is neither of these things,
and which I highly recommend. Quite obviously, if you don't read it, you
won't find out what he's saying. As for the rest - there is plenty of
research on childhood development, starting with the excellent Piaget,
which might help; or you could always study a real child.
Best
A
|