Abstract
Trying to understand how thinking works cannot be separated from trying to understand how reality works. A recent approach to understanding how reality actually “takes place” postulates two complementary aspects. There is a “factual aspect of reality” which is characterized by well-defined predications, causal closure, and local spacetime. But there is a complementary, “statu-nascendi” aspect of reality which addresses how facts, and with them local spacetime, come into being in the first place. This aspect of reality is inherently constellatory, i.e. the constellations of components are the most basic phenomena - somewhat similar to Gestalt phenomena in the visual domain. Human thinking is interpreted as a highly advanced cognitive adaptation to this irreducible Janus-headedness of reality. In parts it can be well defined, in parts it just cannot - because it must leave room for the on-going self-unfolding of meaning. This self-unfolding of meaning is interpreted as the most accurate semantic approximation to the ongoing self-unfolding of reality. It is, thus, not a bug but a crucial feature of complex thinking. Unlike formal languages, which structurally correspond to the factual aspect of reality, natural language is capable of dealing with both aspects of reality: its facticity and its coming into being.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Once developed, presumably several strong positive selection mechanisms kicked in and this explains the - in evolutionary terms - extremely rapid development of advanced cognitive skills based on syntactic language and conceptual hierarchies. As this allowed also for the “outsourcing” of cognitive evolution into modular cultural artifacts, the whole process started to accelerate itself even further - and we got, so to speak, from throwing bones to throwing bombs in just a blink.
- 2.
In treating this objective indeterminacy mathematically one has the huge advantage of putting all that can be said in a seemingly well-defined formalism, the development of the probability function, which is fully deterministic and time-reversible. Yet, one keeps the “real” ontological meaning absolutely open - by cramming all the uncertainty in the unsuspicious use of complex numbers. This mathematical ‘trick’ is very elegant and powerful, but - by offering a somewhat misleading “quasi-classicality” - it also contributed to hiding the radical break of quantum physics with the classical / factual notions of time and reality.
References
Evans JStBT (2003) In two minds - dual-processing accounts of reasoning. TREND Cogn Sci 7:10
Evans JStBT (2008) Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgement and social cognition. Ann Rev Psychol 59:255-278
Regarding the claim of two complementary categorial apparatus and their correspondence to the factual and the statu-nascendi aspect of reality see: von Müller AAC (1983) Zeit und Logik. Wissenschaftszentrum München (ed) Wolfgang Bauer Verlag, München
Filk T, von Müller A (2009) Quantum physics and consciousness: the quest for a common conceptual foundation. Mind Matter 7(1):59-80
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
von Müller, A. (2010). Thought and Reality. In: Glatzeder, B., Goel, V., Müller, A. (eds) Towards a Theory of Thinking. On Thinking. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03129-8_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03129-8_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-03128-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-03129-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)