Advertisement

Perception, Abduction, and Tacit Inference

  • Rico Hermkes
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics book series (SAPERE, volume 27)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to develop an inferential conception of perception. For establishing such a conception, we turned to Peirce, who had been first in systematically linking perception to abductive inferences. However, he did not conceive perception as abduction, because of the impossibility for conscious control. Thus, Peirce spoke of an “extreme case of abduction”. An essential question is, if we can succeed in developing a conception that incorporates tacit inferences. Peirce’s semiotic conception as well as Polanyi’s theory of implicit knowledge work fairly well as a theoretical starting point. By appointing equifunctionality between non-symbolic sign activity and applying logical rules it is possible that inferences can be also realized unconsciously. Furthermore, we point out that feelings may be regarded as indices and illustrate how affirmative judgements can be realized using such indices for judging the validity of an inference. The “Predictive Processing-Approach” seems suitable for finalizing the picture. According to this approach perceptions may be conceived as an inferential triad rather than mere abductive inferences. The upshot is that it enables us to extend it to other forms of unconscious cognition and intuition.

Keywords

Cognitive Level Implicit Knowledge Perceptual Judgement Predictive Processing Predictive Code 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alisch, L.-M. (1995). Pädagogische Wissenschaftslehre. Zum Verhältnis von Ethik, Psychologie und Erziehung. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  2. Alisch, L.-M. (2010). Distanz zu groß, Komplexität zu hoch: Naturalisierung vertagt. In S. Schlüter & A. Langewand (Eds.), Neurobiologie und Erziehungswissenschaft (pp. 186–208). Heilbronn: Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  3. Ashby, W. R. (1981). Induction, prediction, and decision-making in cybernetic systems. In R. Conant (Ed.), Mechanisms of intelligence: Ashby’s Writings on cybernetics (pp. 313–324). Intersystems Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Bastos, A. M., Usrey, W. M., Adams, R. A., Mangun, G. R., Fries, P., & Friston, K. J. (2012). Canonical microcircuits for predictive coding. Neuron, 76, 695–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohm, D. (1973). Quantum theory as an indication of a new order in physics. B. Implicate and explicate order in physical law. Foundations of Physics, 3, 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohm, D. (1990). A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter. Philosophical Psychology, 3, 271–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruner, J. (1957). On perceptual readiness. Psychological Review, 64, 123–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruner, J. (1974). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brunswik, E. (1934). Wahrnehmung und Gegenstandswelt. Grundlegung einer Psychologie vom Gegenstand her. Leipzig: Deuticke.Google Scholar
  10. Brunswik, E. (1948). Statistical separation of perception, thinking, and attitudes. American Psychologist, 3, 342.Google Scholar
  11. Büchel, C., Geuter, S., Sprenger, C., & Eippert, F. (2014). Placebo analgesia: A predictive coding perspective. Neuron, 81, 1223–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ciompi, L. (1993). Die emotionalen Grundlagen des Denkens. Entwurf einer fraktalen Affektlogik. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  13. Ciompi, L. (1998). Affektlogik. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
  14. Ciompi, L. (2011). Gefühle, Affekte, Affektlogik. Wien: Picus.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, A. (2012). Dreaming the whole cat: Generative models, predictive processing, and enactivist conception of perceptual experience. Mind, 121, 753–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Brain Sciences, 36, 181–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark, A. (2015). Embodied prediction. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds.), Open MIND: 7(T) (pp. 1–21). Frankfurt: Main.Google Scholar
  18. Damasio, A. (2006). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  19. Damasio, A. (2012). Self comes to mind. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  20. Dreyfus, H. L. (2006). Overcoming the myth of the mental. Topoi, 25, 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of computer. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Duncker, K. (1926). A qualitative (experimental and theoretical) study of productive thinking (solving of comprehensible problems). Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 33, 642–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Duncker, K. (1935). Zur Psychologie produktiven Denkens. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs 58 (i—113).Google Scholar
  25. El Kachab, C. (2013). The logical goodness of abduction in C.S. Peirce’s thought. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 49, 157–177.Google Scholar
  26. Friston, K. (2011). What is optimal about motor control? Neuron, 72, 488–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Friston, K., Adams, R. A., Perrinet, L., & Breakspear, M. (2012). Perceptions as hypotheses: Saccades as experiments. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–20.Google Scholar
  28. Fuchs, T. (2012), The phenomenology of body memory. In S. C. Koch, T. Fuchs, M. Summa & C. Müller (Eds.), Body memory, metaphor, and movement (pp. 9–22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  29. Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Gut feelings: The intelligence of the unconscious, reprint. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  30. Gigerenzer, G., & Brighton, H. (2009). Homo heuristicus: Why biased minds make better inferences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 107–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Glenberg, A. M. (2008). Embodiment for education. In P. Calvo & A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 355–372). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  32. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. F. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 558–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Goldman, A. (2012). A Moderate approach to embodied cognitive science. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 3, 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Helmholtz, H. (1867). Handbuch von der physiologischen Optik. Leipzig: Voss.Google Scholar
  35. Herbart, J. F. (1892). Von der apperzeption, dem inneren Sinne, und der Aufmerksamkeit. In K. Kehrbach (Ed.), Johann Friedrich Herbarts Sämtliche Werke (Vol. 6, pp. 140–151). Langensalza: Verlag Hermann Beyer & Söhne.Google Scholar
  36. Hohwy, J. (2013). The predictive mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chigaco: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lakoff, G. (1988). Cognitive semantics. In U. Eco, M. Santambrogio & P. Violi (Eds.), Meaning and mental representations (pp. 119–154). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Lange, K. (1912). Apperzeption. Eine psychologisch-pädagogische Monographie. Elfte und zwölfte (Doppel-)Auflage. Leipzig: Voigtländer.Google Scholar
  40. Magnani, L. (2009). Abductive Cognition. The epistemological and eco-cognitive dimension of hypothetical reasoning. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Magnani, L. (2015). Understanding visual abduction. The need of the eco-cognitive model. In L. Magnani & P. Li (Eds.), Philosophy and cognitive science II, western and eastern studies (pp. 117–139). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Minnameier, G. (2004). Peirce-suit of Truth: Why inference to the best explanation and abduction ought not to be confused. Erkenntnis, 60, 75–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Minnameier, G. (2010). The logicality of abduction, deduction and induction. In M. Bergman, S. Paavola, A.-V. Pietarinen & H. Rydenfelt (Eds.), Ideas in Action: Proceedings of the Applying Peirce Conference, Nordic Studies in Pragmatism 1 (pp. 239–251). Helsinki: Nordic Pragmatism Network.Google Scholar
  44. Minnameier, G. (2016). Forms of abduction and an inferential taxonomy. In L. Magnani & T. Bertolotti (Eds.): Springer handbook of model-based reasoning. Berlin: Springer (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  45. Mullins, P. (2002). Peirce’s abduction and Polanyi’s tacit knowing. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 16, 198–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition?. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Nesher, D. (2001). Peircean epistemology of learning and the function of abduction as the logic of discovery. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 37, 23–57.Google Scholar
  48. Neuweg, G. H. (2004). Könnerschaft und implizites Wissen. Zur lehr-lerntheoretischen Bedeutung der Erkenntnis—und Wissenstheorie Michael Polanyis. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  49. Nisbett, R. E., & DeCamp Wilson, T. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes, Psychological Review 44, 231–259.Google Scholar
  50. Nunez, R. E. (2008). Mathematics, the ultimate challenge to embodiment: truth and the grounding of axiomatic systems. In P. Calvo & A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (1st ed., pp. 333–353). San Diego: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  51. Pape, H. (1997). Die Sichtbarkeit der Logik und die visuelle Topologie des Geistes. In H. Pape (Ed.) Die Unsichtbarkeit der Welt (pp. 378–460). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  52. Pickering, M. J., & Clark, A. (2014). Getting ahead: Forward models and their place in cognitive architecture. Trends in Cognitive Science, 18, 451–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Polanyi, M. (1957). Problem solving. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 8, 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Polanyi, M. (1962a). Personal knowledge. Toward a post-critical philosophy. Routledge: London (corrected edition).Google Scholar
  55. Polanyi, M. (1962b). Tacit knowing: Its bearing on some problems in philosophy. Reviews of Modern Physics, 34, 601–616.Google Scholar
  56. Polanyi, M. (1965). The Structure of consciousness. Brain, LXXXVIII, 799–810.Google Scholar
  57. Polanyi, M. (1967a). The logic of tacit inference. Philosophy, 41, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Polanyi, M. (1967b). Sense-giving and sense-reading. Philosophy, 42, 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Polanyi, M. (1968a). Logic and psychology. American Psychologist 23, 27–43.Google Scholar
  60. Polanyi, M. (1968b). The Body-mind relation. In W. R. Coulson & C. R. Rogers (Eds.), Man and the sciences of man (pp. 85–102). Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  61. Polanyi, M. (1969). On body and mind. The New Scholasticism, 43, 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2009). Perception, Representation, and the World: The FINST that Binds, in D. Dedrick & L. Trick (Eds.): Computation, cognition, and Pylyshyn (pp. 3–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  63. Raftopoulos, A. (2001a) Is perception informationally encapsulated? The issue of the theory-ladenness of perception. Cognitive Science 25, 423–451.Google Scholar
  64. Raftopoulos, A. (2001b). Reentrant neural pathways and the theory-ladenness of perception. In Supplement: Proceedings of the 2000 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers (Sep. 2001). Philosophy of Science 68, S187–S199.Google Scholar
  65. Rescher, N. (2007). Default reasoning, In D. Jacquette Handbook of the philosophy of science, philosophy of logic (pp. 1163–1171). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  66. Ryle, G. (1976). Improvisation. Mind, 85, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schurz, G. (2008). Patterns of abduction. Synthese, 164, 201–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Stapp, H. (2009). Mind, matter and quantum mechanics (3rd ed.). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stonier, T. (1992). Beyond information. A natural history of intelligence. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  70. Stonier, T. (1997). Information and meaning. An evolutionary perspective. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Suppes, P. (2003). Rationality, Habits and freedom. In N. Dimitri, M. Basili & I. Gilboa (Eds.), Cognitive processes and economic behavior (pp. 137–167). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Thaggard, P. (2007). Abductive inference: From Philosophical analysis to neural mechanisms. In A. Feeney & E. Heit (Eds.), Inductive reasoning: Experimental, developmental and computational approaches (pp. 226–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Tolman, E. C., & Brunswik, E. (1935). The organism and the causal texture of the environment. Psychological Review, 42, 43–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. van Dalen, D. (2001). Intuitionistic logic. In L. Gobble (Ed.), The Blackwell guide to philosophical logic (pp. 224–257). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Business Ethics and Business EducationGoethe University Frankfurt am MainFrankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations