OJPP  Vol.5 No.7 , November 2015
Artful Deception, Languaging, and Learning—The Brain on Seeing Itself
Abstract: Despite having named ourselves Homo sapiens—a designation contingent on word/reason (logos) as our chosen identifier—recent evidence suggests language is only a small fraction of the story. Human beings would be more aptly named Homo videns—seeing man—if percentage of cortex area per modality determined the labeling of an organism. Instead, the sentential ontology of language philosophers and linguists persists in spite of the growing body of cognitive research challenging the language instinct as our most defining characteristic. What is becoming clearer is that language is palimpsestic. It is like a marked transparency over visuospatial maps, which are wired to sensorimotor maps. The left lateralized interpreter uses language to communicably narrativize an apparent unity, but people are not the only fictionalizing animals. This examination looks to cognitive and psychological studies to suggest that a prelinguistic instinct to make sense of unrelated information is a biological consequence of intersections among pattern matching, symbolic thinking, aesthetics, and emotive tagging, which is accessible by language, but not a product thereof. Language, rather, is just an outer surface. Rather than thinking man, playing man, or tool-making man, we would be better described as storytelling animals (narrativism). Like other social mammals, we run simulation heuristics to predict causal chains, object/event frequency, value association, and problem solving. The post hoc product is episodic fiction. Language merely serves to magnify what Friederich Nietzsche is rightfully identified as an art of dissimulation—lying. In short, the moral of the story is that we are making it all up as we go along.
Cite this paper: Preston, A. (2015) Artful Deception, Languaging, and Learning—The Brain on Seeing Itself. Open Journal of Philosophy, 5, 403-417. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2015.57049.

[1]   Amato, L. A. (2011). The Ethical Imagination: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Relationship between Responsibility and Creativity. Retrieved from UMI Dissertation Publishing, ProQuest, Richardson, TX: University of Texas at Dallas.

[2]   Aristotle (1994). On the Soul. J. A. Smith Hollingdale (Trans.), Internet Classics Archive. Boston: MIT Press.

[3]   Campbell, J. (1991). The Power of Myth. New York: Anchor Books.

[4]   Camplin, T. (2009). Diaphysics. New York: Rowan & Littlefield.

[5]   Carbonell, E., Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Rodríguez, X., Sahnouni, M., Sala, R., & Vergès, J. M. (2001). Structure Morphotechnique de L’industrie Lithique du Pleistocene Inferieur et Moyen d’Atapuerca. L’Anthropologie, 105, 259-280.

[6]   Churchland, P. (1989) Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind/Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[7]   Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of Processing and the Retention of Words in Episodic Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294.

[8]   Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of Processing. A Framework for Memory Research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.

[9]   Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Penguin Putnam.

[10]   Dante, A. (1995). Par. Canto XXII. The Divine Comedy. A. Mandelbaum (Trans.), New York: Everyman’s Library.

[11]   Dowling, W. J. (2012). Philosophical Foundations of Psychology. Seminar. Issues in Cognition and Neuroscience. University of Texas at Dallas, Lecture.

[12]   Ebbinghaus, H. (1913). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology. New York: Teacher’s College, Columbia Uni versity.

[13]   Foyer, J. (2012). Feats of Memory Anyone Can Do. Ted Talk.

[14]   Gaz-zaniga, M. (2011). Who’s in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain. New York: Harper Collins.

[15]   Gibbs, R. (1999). The Poets of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[16]   Hebb, D. O. (1949). The Organization of Behavior. New York: Wiley.

[17]   Heidegger, M. (2008). Basic Writings. D. F. Krell (Ed.), 1977. New York: Harper Collins.

[18]   Huizinga, J. (1950). Homo Ludens. London: Routledge.

[19]   Katz, A., Cacciari, C., Gibbs, R., & Turner, M. (1998). Figurative Language and Thought. New York: Oxford University Press.

[20]   Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1989). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

[21]   Lokhorst, G.-J. (2013). Descartes and the Pineal Gland. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 18 September 2013.

[22]   Lovejoy, A. (1964). The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[23]   Nietzsche, F. (1974). The Gay Science: With a Prelude in Rhymes and an Appendix of Songs. W. Kaufmann (Trans.), New York: Vintage Books.

[24]   Nietzsche, F. (2006). On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense. In K. A. Pearson, & D. Large (Eds.), The Nietzsche Reader (pp. 114-123). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

[25]   Nietzsche, F. (2003). Thus Spoke Zarathustra: A Book for Everyone and No One. R. J. Hollingdale (Trans.), New York: Penguin.

[26]   Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. New York: Harper Collins.

[27]   Plato (1997). Theaetetus. Plato Complete Works. M. J. Levett (Trans.), J. M. Cooper (Ed.), Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.

[28]   Pound, E. (1987). ABC of Reading. New York: New Directions.

[29]   Ramachandran, V. S. (2011). The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Quest for What Makes Us Human. New York: Norton.

[30]   Shields, C. (2010). Aristotle’s Psychology. 2000. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 23 August 2010.

[31]   Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic Memory: From Mind to Brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 3-26.

[32]   Turner, F. (1992). Natural Classicism: Essays on Literature and Science. 1985. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.

[33]   Yao, X. Z. (2000). An Introduction to Confucianism. New York: Cambridge University Press.