cognitive sciences, Response to fellow classmate – Week 5 DQ 1 Michael Hogue – writinghub.net
There are several compelling reasons for the cognitive sciences to be able to provide a more thorough understanding of personality compared to older models. To begin, the cognitive sciences developed much later than psychoanalytic theory, structuralism, functionalism, and later than behaviorism (Mischel & Yoda, 1995). It was therefore able to glean compelling evidences and heavy contentions from the ideas that had come before, to produce a view that was at least cognizant of the great ideas from the past. However, the more striking reason for cognitive science to be more accurate and comprehension was the rapid advancements in science and technology. With the development of the microprocessor the brain began to be conceptualized by psychologists as metaphorically similar to the computer (Hunt & Ellis, 2004) – which in my opinion is closer to reality than the previous models. Additionally, neuroscience – which had its own multi-century history – was beginning to reach definitive conclusions in relation to neuron theory and was beginning to uncover important pathways, regions, and somatotopic maps. These discoveries would allow cognitive scientists to observe that which was previously unobservable – the functioning of the mind. The culmination of all these features gave cognitive science many advantages over previous models, leading the way for more accurate and comprehensive information. However, that does not invalidate anything good and true that had been learned by the earlier models.
Please respond to the above question using 150-250 words. No references are needed unless you want to use them.