Journal logo


What Did You Wanna Hear?

By umer aliPublished about a year ago 3 min read
Photo by Harnoor dhaliwal on Unsplash

. However, the cases in which people discussed and argued over the explanations of others are not limited to debates over diagnoses. People often debate about moral issues and intellectual topics. Perhaps, the most well-known instance is the “debate” on whether there is a moral difference between slavery and stealing. The debate started with Emancipation. Why would a discussion about moral issues be less fruitful than a debate over beliefs about the things that happen around us? For example, on a similar question, do the judgments people make on other people in stressful situations actually reflect the opinions that people hold about those people? The very fact that people have begun to discuss and argue about such scenarios also implies that something is going on with judgments of others. It is, perhaps, by constructing such arguments, that people develop cognitive tools to respond to situations in which they are making judgments. It is not surprising that in discussing such topics people debate with others. It is not their knowledge about a situation that is questioned but their motives and understanding of it. The debate, therefore, allows us to explain some cognitive phenomena and, hopefully, lead to a better understanding of other people’s choices and behaviour.

A different way of understanding how we discover knowledge is by developing more cognitive theories of truth and truth-seeking. A cognitive theory of truth-seeking describes the processes of judgment, reasoning, inference, and reasoning about the implications of one’s judgments. As most theories of truth-seeking do, cognitive theories treat the problems of belief determination and cognitive judgement as instances in which people do not require any extra conceptual structures (e.g., attitudes or concepts) to formulate beliefs. Indeed, one might argue that it is their reasoning about how to think about and respond to situations that leads to new beliefs and, ultimately, new cognitive understanding. It is, perhaps, this process of reasoning about specific situations that allows for theories of truth-seeking to develop as they allow us to explain how we reason about situations and generate new ideas about the world around us.

Trying to explain how we get new ideas about things that we see around us is a problem that is still an active area of cognitive research. New insights into what people think and how they make decisions about situations could potentially improve our understanding of people’s reasoning abilities and encourage the development of new insights about our cognitive processes. By doing so, we can improve the knowledge that we have about our own cognitive processes and contribute to the ongoing debate about truth and knowledge.

Broadly, different theories of truth-seeking describe different features of human reasoning. While theories about the origins of knowledge often focus on intellectual and cognitive processes, other theories focus on the circumstances in which people hold beliefs. Further, some theories suggest that there are no or few considerations that people take into account while making judgments. An example of this is the cognitive theories in which people do not use their attitudes or cognitive processes. Instead, people try to understand situations to the maximum extent possible and come to their own judgments... or, perhaps, they simply explain situations to the extent that they can make up their minds. Other theories focus on the situations in which people are trying to gain knowledge. Rather than merely justifying their actions to themselves and others, some theorists explain why they should or should not try to improve their knowledge.

That is what these debates are about. There is a debate about the reasons we hold specific beliefs and the extent to which people make specific choices or engage in specific actions. One way to understand why people develop certain beliefs is to try to explain why they formulate them. In this way, we might be able to explain, at least in part, why we evaluate certain ideas. Indeed, theories of cognitive processes attempt to explain the processes of thinking that people use in order to understand and explain their own cognitive processes and that of others.

This understanding of cognitive processes and our understanding of why people differ in...

That It Now Enjoy Your Day


About the Creator

umer ali

You Might Learn A thing or two here

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights


There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.