Recently finished doing research at the History of Hermetic Philosophy and Related Currents Department at the University of Amsterdam using 4E Cognition and Conceptual Metaphor approaches to explore practices of Ritual Magic. The main focus is the embodiment and extension of metaphor through imaginal and somatic techniques as a means of reconceptualizing the relationship of self and world. The hope is to point toward the rich potential of combining the emerging fields of study in 4E Cognition and Esotericism.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382061052_Experiencing_the_Elements_Self-Building_Through_the_Embodied_Extension_of_Conceptual_Metaphors_in_Contemporary_Ritual_Magic

For those wondering what some of these ideas mentioned above are:

4E is a movement in cognitive science that doesn't look at the mind as only existing in the brain, but rather mind is Embodied in an organism, Embedded in a socio-environmental context, Enacted through engagement with the world, and Extended into the world (4E's). It ends up arriving at a lot of ideas about mind and consciousness that are strikingly similar to hermetic, magical, and other esoteric ideas about the same topic.

Esotericism is basically rejected knowledge (such as Hermeticism, Magic, Kabbalah, Alchemy, etc.) and often involves a hidden or inner knowledge/way of interpretation which is communicated by symbols.

Conceptual Metaphor Theory is an idea in cognitive linguistics that says the basic mechanism through which we conceptualize things is metaphor. Its essentially says metaphor is the process by which we combine knowledge from one area of experience to another. This can be seen in how widespread metaphor is in language. It popped up twice in the last sentence (seen, widespread). Popped up is also a metaphor, its everywhere! It does a really good job of not saying things are "just a metaphor" and diminishing them, but rather elevates them to a level of supreme importance.

Basically the ideas come from very different areas of study (science, spirituality, philosophy) but fit together in a really fascinating and quite unexpected way. I give MUCH more detailed explanations in the text, so check it out if this sounds interesting to you!!!

I'm a layperson but my academic background is in Neuroscience (working in commercial 'behavioural' research for products/market behaviors) and I've been doing a side quest on building an app primarily for dementia detection, I've been reading papers for months and doing desk research on what's out there already.

Basically it requires building a battery of digital neuropsychological tests, all of which I know has been done and validated before, so it's possible.

I understand that for my idea to be taken seriously, I will need to scientifically validate it, and it's likely that if I'm going to go to market and get funding rounds I will need someone with more "Qualifications" to back it up (and help with the project design and analysis)

How do I go about finding someone?

Is this a case of emailing all the professors / post docs I find who are in a related specialism and field and see who's interested?

How do I get their time?

Can industry and academia collaborate?

Any information on how these partnerships work would be much appreciated

I've been studying intellgence on my own for awhile now, and I've gotten my IEP papers. I realized that a lot of my problems stem from these two things. My proccesing speed until recently was extremely low, so was my working memory. They have improved but the relitive weaknesses are still there. I realized that if I removed motor skills from the equation I do better on tasks that messure speed, if I switch to spatial memory it's far better. I questioned whether my working memory or proccesing speed was bad, or it was just the quirks of the test. My question is whether or not it is common for people with autism to have these issues.

Apparently according to the Lawrence H Weiss book below an iq of 110, if theres a discrepancy people tend to have better memory and processing than their Verbal/perceptual abstract reasoning abilities.
This is fascinating if true. It would suggest that a typical person with an IQ of 95 would be likely to have high average memory 108 and average processing speed but lower in abstract reasoning.
I think this would have social implications also a typical person with an IQ of 120 might have a GAI of 140 but feel overwhelmed in conversations and in life talking to folks of low average intelligence. This probably has an implication in sport too with people of average intelligence posing radically high coding scores and visual motor dexterity.

Hi. Guys

Looking through my Wais iii test I scored lower on CPI than reasoning by around 30 points. My working memory and processing speed are the equivalent of an IQ of 99. I have a processing speed discrepancy of 5 points which makes that category uninterruptible. 12 for coding and 7 for symbol search. I also have a bad visual memory usually getting around iq 85 on Corsi test. With processing discrepancy it’s usually the other way with folks doing better on symbol search meaning they have decent mental speed but better psychomotor skills. Does anyone understand the opposite profile?

Yann Lecun (one of the godfathers of Deep Learning) often gets into debates on Twitter about the nature of human intelligence. In a recent one, he wrote:

One can learn without vision, but not without touch.

From the context, I think he meant that if both sight and touch are missing, a child will not develop into an intelligent adult, no matter how much support the child receives.

I wonder if it's true.

I know that there are cases where a disease that affects the brain also caused paralysis and blindness at an early age. But I don't think those can tell us much about human cognitive development.

Does science know any cases where someone with a normal brain lost both sight and touch (e.g. from paralysis) at a very early age?

(Full disclaimer: I work on the show, but I’m not one of the hosts!)

If you're into behavioral science, cognitive science, or just love exploring why people do what they do, check out Behavioral Grooves! It's a laid-back podcast that dives into all things behavioral science, with a wide range of episodes focusing on everything from motivation and memory to relationships and economics.

We’d love to get some feedback on what’s working and what could be better. We're trying to build a community where we can chat and connect with like-minded folks, so if you’ve got a few minutes, pick an episode that catches your eye and let me know what you think!

https://behavioralgrooves.com/

i forget words all the time.

today i was explaining to someone how to measure a cylinder to find its volume in a lab of mine and the sentence was literally "instead of measuring so and so, you are supposed to measure this other thing" except i forgot the word measure AFTER I HAD ALREADY SAID IT ONCE. the sentence ended up going more like "instead of measuring so and so, you are supposed to.... um..... this part, get this part instead...." I knew i had literally just said the word but i couldn't for the life of me recall it.

i try to talk to people about normal fucking things and its just impossible for me to find my words. this includes names too - i have friends i'm so incredibly close to who i've known for forever and i'll go to address them and have to sit there for 10+ seconds trying to recall what their name is. i'm 19 years old and just want to know if this is normal

I have a Bachelors and a Masters in Computer Science(International student in the US). I always had an interest towards psychology and I want to pursue a phd in cognitive science(as it combines both computer science and psychology). Should I go for it or should I explore any other phd courses that combine computer science and psychology? If you want me to go for CogSci, are there good opportunities out there for someone with a phd in cogsci?

Either way, we are looking for participants for a brief 5-10 minute research survey to gain a better understanding about individuals’ decisions to do physical activity. Link: https://rutgers.ca1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eDKBn95P94Wbuia

This study had been approved by Rutgers University IRB: Pro2024001792

I've recently moved to Luxembourg, a country where many languages are spoken, and I'm working here as a neuropsychologist.

I see adults with cognitive difficulties who are being assessed for various conditions, such as psychosis, Alzheimer's, brain cancer, ADHD, etc., and I also offer rehabilitation services.

Like my colleagues, I use cognitive tests as part of my evaluations. To ensure accurate analysis, it's important that these tests are conducted in the patient's native language.

The challenge I face is that while I speak French, English, and German, the cognitive tests I currently have are only in French. Are there any colleagues who would be willing to share English, German, or Portuguese versions of cognitive tests?

I'm more than happy to provide my French versions in exchange and am also willing to pay for them.

Hi everyone,

I'm excited to share my recent preprint, Explaining Qualia: A Proposed Theoretical Framework for Addressing the Hard Problem of Consciousness. This paper delves into the enigma of consciousness, particularly the subjective experience of qualia, and offers a novel theoretical framework that challenges reductionist views. I explore the intricate relationship between consciousness, identity, and subjective experience, proposing a model that integrates non-physical information alongside brain function.

I welcome any feedback, critiques, or discussions on this topic—whether you agree with the perspective or have alternative ideas. Feel free to share it widely, and if you find it useful in your own research, please just remember to cite it. Let's advance the conversation on one of the most challenging puzzles in contemporary philosophy and cognitive science together!

Link to the paper: OSF Link

Looking forward to your thoughts!

I want to share what i believe is going on with DNB and why people seem to observe results that go beyond just their working memory and I think it is simply meditation. If you check out the andrew huberman video on meditaiton, he mentions that there is a broadly two types of meditation (internalized or externalized) and with externalized, you are aiming to observe something outside of your innerself (a dot on the wall for instance). I think DNB is exactly like this, but with the added benefit of instantanious feedback, which is actually good for training. For instance, if you have 3 packets of working memory available and you get distracted, you instantiously lose 1, so your score drops. Over time practicing, I belive you train the skill of speed when it comes to observing your distractions and taking your attention back, this is especially important when you are the difficulty level where (almost) all your current memory packets are being used, which forces you to focus.

PS: In some fashion, it is more effective than just focusing on breath meditation, because you are getting a more instantinous feedback. But in general, the type of distraction you have during your day are more similiar to the one you have when you meditate, because you don't have this metric that tells you instantiously if your working memory is reduced. Therefore, it places you in a more chronic state of self-monitoring that I don't think DNB by its self can do.

Hi,

I´d really appreciate if any of you wise people could review my Medium summary on how people could use neuroplasticity to tackle trauma/ harmful indoctrination.

Where did I go wrong?

How can I improve it?

Which other sources can you refer me to?

Thank you so much!

When I say cognitive intervention, I typically mean taking a more acute sense of self awareness in situations to control the outcome.

My understanding is that this is most correctly or noticeably implemented, through language.

i.e. the use of words or self-instruction.

Example: one technique taught in conventional CBT is, when tempers flair the patient says to themself, "stop, slow down, breath, go and splash water on your face".

i.e. it's a form of self instruction modifying the outcome, mitigating a potentially compromising outburst in temper.

........

Basically taking this concept to its extreme (i.e. implementation of words to modify or influence a potential outcome);

Firstly, when affecting behaviour, temper or emotion, we must affect its underwriting component which is, NEURAL FUNCTION.

Neurons function on the basis of electrical excitations or "action potentials", that is to say on the basis of electricity or, electromagnetism.

We know from physics that electromagnetism is WAVE BASED, and generates an electromagnetic field (referred to by some as the vibration a person has, or their "vibe").

Therefore, to most affectively impact neural function, the nature of the words we implement must be consistent with this.
i.e. be wave based.

The peculiar co-incidence here is that, EMOTION (an abbreviation for eccentric-motion, how a wave moves), also appears to be wave based.
So we could say, neurons act on the basis of 1) waves, OR on the basis of 2) emotion.

.........

Words with 1) wave relevance, or 2) emotional relevance:

i.e. words which have the most AFFECT on others = generate the most emotional IMPACT.

So if we revised the English dictionary for words with the highest level of emotional specificity (or wave specificity, for our purposes they're the same), what would emerge?

https://preview.redd.it/hqfyvvonz9md1.jpg?width=2152&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=767a8573cc26ba9a855ec2a639109f831441647c

https://preview.redd.it/vshiceqoz9md1.jpg?width=2298&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6da6db3c3e6fd2a467e8e2ef554652a77a38d573

Just out of curiousity, assuming two such words are illustrated on these two screen shots from a dictionary, what would they be?

Which word from each picture has the highest level of emotional specificity?

.........

Assuming they're identified, say we subsequently implement them in a situation.

I guess the simple starting question could be, could that theory unfold, a potentially optimal behavioural outcome?

If the premise of CBT is to control or influence ones own emotions in a situation, if we as above, implement self instruction with the highest possible level of emotional specificity.......... could that render a superior outcome, a potentially optimal behavioural outcome, or what kind of an outcome could it be?

Does that even make sense? lol

Whenever I look at some sexual abuse cases like R kelly , Larry Nassar or Epstein it makes me absolutely hate them and wish the worst on them. Most share this sentiment that come across such cases as well but still what makes us feel this way ? Is such disgust and anger socially constructed or is it innate in the sense that humans evolutionarily value freedom and consent ? There seems to be cultures in the east (not all of them since I'm not making a generalization) that don't see sexual abuse as a big deal or morbidly enough even ENCOURAGE it (as part of rituals and rites) which is radiated in the lack of long penalties and societies over there not seeing it as a big deal. I'm a moral realist and rawlsian so I'm certain that SA is almost definately unethical no matter the context but still is the way we feel about it as witnesses socially constructed ? what about trauma responses felt by victims influenced by culture of the place ? I.e if a culture doesn't view sex as a sacred act or does not see victims of rape as been tainted or defiled , would that lower the trauma if not outright eliminate the suffering arising from sexual assault of women in those places and by how much ?

I have a GAI FSIQ of almost 2sd. Gifted only in VR but my PRI is 113. However there’s an outlier score in the PRI of 9 which is block design. Weschler created the other PRI tests in order to test spatial intelligence without concern of motor skills. The essentials book has a concept called spatial intelligence without concern of motor skills that is PRI without block design. When I took the supplemental Figure weight test I got 13ss which turns my PRI to 123. This is usually done for people with significant motor issues that don’t allow them to do the test. However that would not be a valid PRI for me given that my block design was normal but would be a contextual score for my abstract reasoning with motor skills. It that means that I have a 130+ GAI (without consideration of motor skills).

Hi Everyone,

My academic background includes a Bachelors' Degree (Zoology, Botany and Geology) with about 36 credits in courses like animal behavior, genetics, evolutionary biology and physiology. I also have a Master's degree, where I completed around 30 credits in computer programming, technical writing, and research-focused related courses, but also my masters degree is not related to the domain of cognitive science or not even to biology (its related to Geographic information systems)

As I look to transition into the field of cognitive science, I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed by the number of programs available. I'm genuinely passionate about this field, especially areas like neuro-cognitive psychology and cognitive systems. However, I'm struggling to find programs that align with my academic background and interests.

If anyone has suggestions for master's programs that could be a good fit, I would deeply appreciate your insights. The process of navigating through various requirements and eligibility criteria has been quite challenging, and it’s starting to take a toll on me.

Thank you in advance for any advice or guidance you can offer. It means a lot to me during this frustrating and confusing time.

I did a bachelor in psychology and wanted to go into Cognitive Science for my masters. I want to prepare myself by learning some more python. I did an introductory course on python at a uni before but that was also very broad and not very cognitive science specific. Is there any courses that teach more the specific kind of python programming that I would need in the Cognitive Science world? I would also appreciate some Books that I could read in preparation. Any tips would be appreciated :)

l: firstQuestion

t: range

q: How long have you been working in the current field?

• {min=0, max=10, start=50, left=0, right=10+}

l: secondQuestion

t: radio

q: Has your satisfaction increased since last year, when you worked in the field !!!firstQuestion - 1 (HOW SHOULD IT BE FORMATTED)

• Yes

• No

Thanks!

Hello, I've been very into the whole IQ and psychology thing for a week or so now. And I've seen in a lot of places where people talk about that IQ can't be increased and so on. I mostly just want to know why it can't and the research that backs it up. And also if you guys could recommend me places where I can best learn about these things that would be nice!
Thank you!

P.L P-1R-22376

I have been studying both for about 2 decades, and I think they have a lot in common. I'm aware of a lot of research in the field (Mind and Life Conference, Vipassana and mindfulness techniques, Kabat-Zinn's stuff etc) but I think it can go even deeper.

However, there seem to be some fundamental incompatibilities, such as Western medicine assuming a self exists, whereas Buddhism has the no-self teaching.

It does seem to me that sometimes psychology plays a little "catch-up" as Buddhism has a complex phenomenology of the mind. However, I still believe the scientific method has value, and of course, the grant money. :)

I would be interested to hear what people have to say on this issue.

I am sure this subreddit gets questions daily about changing IQ and the comments are usually full of people sharing their opinions and experience and honestly it's usually very stupid.

The most convincing argument i have seen that IQ cannot be changed, and what I always see cited by people like Jordan Peterson, is that when researchers gave people brain puzzles, g was not increased.

But to me that isn't sufficient to say IQ can't be changed. That's like saying "I gave depressed people gratitude puzzles every day for 30 mins and their depression did not go away in the long term" like yeah, no shit. Anything going on in the brain is extremely unlikely to change and is complicated and is unlikely to change with short activities in a research trial. What were these trails actually like?

Another thing I have heard which is also convincing is that people's IQs remain stable across a lifetime. But this says very little about whether IQ can be changed. What it tells us is that it doesn't change. Well no shit. People don't change habits they've been practicing for years and years and on average are likely to be in the same category to how they were 20 yrs ago in all facets of life including income, temperament, personality, attractiveness, religion, hobbies, and location. I am not saying IQ can change, but this isn't good enough evidence. was the research more complex than longitude studies?

Lastly, the most convincing of all, is that apparently in studies referenced from the 60s-70s in the 1994 book "the bell curve", students of African descent in Europe were unlikely to have improvements in their IQ scores after improvements to education and nutrition. This is the topic likely to trigger us the most, because racism is a real issue and something people have used IQ to justify. But if we don't get to the bottom of it and settle the matter once and for all, people will increasingly use these stats to justify racism. it can't be ignored.

I want to figure this out. I want to see all of the immutable evidence that IQ cannot be changed positively or that it remains relatively stable across a person's lifetime regardless of mental illness, nutrition, and education into adulthood.

Let's keep this discussion strictly about the current research and avoid sharing too many personal opinions.

Hi

I have a BA in Neuroscience and currently work in healthcare (entry level, no certifications).

I am still conflicted about what I want to do, and considered getting either an MA or general education in CogSci, but I'm not sure if it's worth it in the current job market. (I want to get out of healthcare, ideally).

Any ideas of jobs that would hire for someone with higher ed in CogSci? Beyond going into academia (which requires a PhD and massive amounts of student debt?)

I am doing some research on Software Dev/Coding. Not my strong suit, but now that I look into it, it seems kind of interesting. I'd be open to jobs that combine tech as well.

What is one area in cognitive science that you think could do with more EEG analysis,if any?

HII! I am currently re-working on a mobile pet grooming site/project I did in one of my COGSCI classes. Essentially, I am trying to gather market and customer research so that the site may be designed better for customer engagement. It would mean a lot if you were to fill out this questionnaire so that I can report back what customers look for in mobile/ pet grooming businesses. It will only take you 2-5 minutes to complete! 

Thank You  https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdSCMBH6EA3t9wDsYoHpYP_j_dOxa0Cp3Qr9W1d_hMUrQ0oiA/viewform?usp=sf_link

Players for online video content on most websites and social networks either prohibit any speed higher than 1x (e.g. YouTube Shorts, Instagram Reels, etc.) or offer a limited set of speeds (e.g. 1.25x, 1.5x, 1.75x and 2x for YouTube long videos). The ClipGlider application solves this problem, allowing user to set any speed from 0.07x to 16x for any online video.

ClipGlider displays a video playback control panel while a video is playing, user can change the playback speed and quickly skip back/forward in 1 tap using this panel. Each video starts playing at user's preferred speed, so there is no need to manually set the playback speed for each new video. It seems that there are no other applications on mobile phones that offer such features, and it's available for iOS, Android and smart-TVs with Android TV.

Besides the ability to set any speed, ClipGlider offers many other features:

• All videos will start playing at the speed you set in the preferences.
• Ability to jump back/forward by 15/120/300 seconds in one tap
• Ability to jump to a specific moment in time by directly specifying the timestamp or %, e.g. 1h:28m (you choose "1", "2", "8" from drop-down lists), or 38% of the video.
• Ability to amplify the sound of the online video you are watching (works on Android only) - useful for watching videos in noisy environments
• Ability to remove audio noise from the video (works only on Android) - useful for watching lectures
• Ability to watch social networks in windowed or split-screen mode
• Autoscrolling (autonext) of short videos (YouTube Shorts, Instagram Reels), so you can watch Reels or Shorts of an expert/coach while doing some work or exercises.
• Control video playback with external keyboard or gamepad

Since people spend more than 2 hours a day on social networks and most of the content there is video, using this app could save its users about 30 minutes a day.

The question is: what do you think, is it a good idea to suggest parents to get this app and suggest their children to use it to watch TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels at 1.5x speed (instead of native apps at 1x speed) to speed up their development?

As the app allows precise control over the playback speed, parents can set the speed to 1.05x for the first week, 1.1x for the second week and so on, increasing the default speed by 0.05x each week.

Thanks for your answers!

I’m finding the course to be really interesting and plan on getting a masters degree in the same. Which are the best universities that offer the same? And what are the job opportunities after that?

I have a bachelors in computer science