COG SCI 180 FINAL STUDY GUIDE
Epistemology - Answer -(Western) Science vs (Eastern) Contemplation
- Science: Uses sensory perception and logical reasoning (ex. Scientific method)
- Contemplation: Uses techniques to cultivate a clear and stable mind so one can
directly perceive the truth
Scientific vs Contemplative Approaches - Answer -Similarities:
- Both are empirically-based, i.e. not based on blind adherence to belief or what
authorities say
- Conclusions must be verified through consensual agreement of investigators who are
highly trained to be considered valid
Differences
- Science: Operates from a 3rd person perspective
- Contemplation: Operates from a 1st person perspective
Common Criticism of Contemplative Approach by Science - Answer -The introspection
objection
- One criticism of the contemplative approach is that is sounds a lot like introspection,
which is highly subjective and unreliable
- Introspection: observing and reporting one's mental and emotional processes as
objectively as possible
- Introspection was used in early psychological experiments in the 19th century but has
been discredited and is not considered a valid method of investigation
Contemplative answer to objection: - Answer -- There is an important distinction
between contemplation and introspection: contemplation first requires extensive training
of the mind to become stable and clear using specific techniques
- Ricard points out that introspection was discredited because the participants who had
originally been asked to engage in it in laboratory studies did so with minds that were
distracted most of the time
- It "feels" different when the mind is agitated, distracted, and murky vs when it is stable
and crystal clear
- These various mental states and associated effects are delineated precisely within
contemplative traditions
,Reproducibility - Answer -- Reproducibility figures as a criterion in the contemplative
approach, just as in the scientific approach
- There is interindividual consensus among trained contemplatives with regard to
conclusions arrived at, which is not the case for untrained subjects
- This may be compared to the process followed by mathematicians who, having
undergone common training, can understand each other as they discuss the subject,
using the same language, and reach similar insights
- Unless you are trained in mathematics though, it would be hard to grasp those
concepts and follow those discussions
- In addition, the results can be reproduced by a particular investigator at different points
in time, as well as by other investigators
- That is, the insights into the nature of reality and the mind are directly perceived when
one stabilizes and clarifies the mind can be experienced again and again in meditation
How do you train and how do you know that you are progressing in your training? -
Answer -- Training involves applying specific techniques to stabilize and clarify the
mind, and progress is indicated by the extent to which you can apply the instructions
- In addition, during training there are structured dialogues between the student and an
expert (teacher) to monitor the student's progress
- The teacher leads the dialogue, asking appropriate questions and allowing the subject
to describe his or her experience in detail
- In the Zen and in Tibetan Buddhist traditions, for instance, the student will from time to
time report about their meditative experiences to their teacher
- On the basis of these experiences, a qualified teacher will be able to appraise the
quality of the student's meditative practice and see whether it reflects genuine progress
or mere self-deceptions - and guide the student
Koans - Answer -- In the Rinzai school, koans are used to test a student's progress in
Zen practice - they are "riddles" that a student has to solve
- Ex. What is the sound of one hand clapping? What was the appearance of your face
before your ancestors were born?
- The obscure riddles, bewildering dialogues, and flagrant contradictions that form the
koans help the student ground their thinking in reality and break free of the conceptual
mind, i.e. the categorizing, analyzing ordinary thinking mind
,- This is related to the idea raised in the last lecture about potential limitations of the
"left-brain" logical self that suppresses more expansive right-brain consciousness
- All koans must be answered from within the realm of one's own personal experience
Koans Purpose - Answer -- Koans are meant to be pondered in mediation practice and
throughout the day til the answer opens the true heart of the question
- Traditionally, answers could not be found in books nor are the koans discussed with
other mediation practitioners
- Even if you somehow managed to find a "correct answer" sheathing is not really
possible, because each koan has many answers, both in terms of the actual verbal
response and the effects it produces on one's mind and emotions
- The answer to the koan is not in fact in the verbal response, but in how you are
responding
- Even the wisest Zen teacher cannot predict the right answer for a particular student
(though they can "see" if the student has the answer)
- You must find the answer for yourself, and it will not be an answer that your
conceptual mind can deduce
- Once experienced, the answer is often a life-changing experience, and comes with a
force that is self-validating - it needs no confirmation from anyone else
Koan Example - Answer -- So what is the sound of one hand clapping?
- Correct answer may be "Depends on what the hand is clapping against!"
demonstrating insight into yin and yang, the Gestalt, figure and ground
- Or it might be to face the questioner, assume an appropriate Buddhist posture, and
without a word, thrust one hand forward
- And how would you know when you've arrived at the right answer?
- The correct answer will induce an experience of kensho, a sudden flash of insight or
awakening, i.e. non dual consciousness, usually accompanied by bliss - this is in fact
the main purpose of koans
- Can conclusions drawn by contemplatives be verified by a third party?
- Only if the person has had training
- A similar process exists in science
, If you don't know much about physics and mathematics, then you being by trusting the
experts because you assume that they are reliable
You trust them because they agree among themselves after having carefully verified
each other's findings
However, you also know that if you were to train properly in their discipline then you
would be able to check all of this yourself
Meditation Masters - Answer -- Lastly, people within contemplative traditions generally
agree on the point of which meditation masters have achieved the highest levels of
realization
- This is similar to how there is generally conscience among the scientific community
regarding who the experts are
- It could be argued that these contemplatives are all deceiving themselves
- However, as Ricard says "It would be a bit strange if the whole cohort of people with
sharp acumen who have refined their introspective faculties to such an extent deluded
themselves in exactly the same way at various times in history and in various places"
- In addition, the contemplative approach supposedly works because it results in a clear
and stable mind
- Finding that long-term "super-meditators" are neurologically, as well as
psychologically, off-the-charts on measures of traits like attention, empathy, and
optimism would appear to support that claim
Neuropsychological Research on Long-Term Meditators - Answer -- EEG studies by
Richard Davidson found that mediation practice is associated with increased left
prefrontal activity
Left prefrontal activity is known to be associated with optimism and feelings of
happiness and well-being
Early on, Davidson noticed that an elderly Tibetan monk in one of his studies showed
much greater predominance of activity in the left prefrontal than any of the other
participants he had previously tested
Research on other long-term meditators provided further confirmatory evidence
For instance, one meditation adept, Matthieu Ricard, showed increased left prefrontal
cortical activity that was 4.5 standard deviations outside the standard bell curve
Epistemology - Answer -(Western) Science vs (Eastern) Contemplation
- Science: Uses sensory perception and logical reasoning (ex. Scientific method)
- Contemplation: Uses techniques to cultivate a clear and stable mind so one can
directly perceive the truth
Scientific vs Contemplative Approaches - Answer -Similarities:
- Both are empirically-based, i.e. not based on blind adherence to belief or what
authorities say
- Conclusions must be verified through consensual agreement of investigators who are
highly trained to be considered valid
Differences
- Science: Operates from a 3rd person perspective
- Contemplation: Operates from a 1st person perspective
Common Criticism of Contemplative Approach by Science - Answer -The introspection
objection
- One criticism of the contemplative approach is that is sounds a lot like introspection,
which is highly subjective and unreliable
- Introspection: observing and reporting one's mental and emotional processes as
objectively as possible
- Introspection was used in early psychological experiments in the 19th century but has
been discredited and is not considered a valid method of investigation
Contemplative answer to objection: - Answer -- There is an important distinction
between contemplation and introspection: contemplation first requires extensive training
of the mind to become stable and clear using specific techniques
- Ricard points out that introspection was discredited because the participants who had
originally been asked to engage in it in laboratory studies did so with minds that were
distracted most of the time
- It "feels" different when the mind is agitated, distracted, and murky vs when it is stable
and crystal clear
- These various mental states and associated effects are delineated precisely within
contemplative traditions
,Reproducibility - Answer -- Reproducibility figures as a criterion in the contemplative
approach, just as in the scientific approach
- There is interindividual consensus among trained contemplatives with regard to
conclusions arrived at, which is not the case for untrained subjects
- This may be compared to the process followed by mathematicians who, having
undergone common training, can understand each other as they discuss the subject,
using the same language, and reach similar insights
- Unless you are trained in mathematics though, it would be hard to grasp those
concepts and follow those discussions
- In addition, the results can be reproduced by a particular investigator at different points
in time, as well as by other investigators
- That is, the insights into the nature of reality and the mind are directly perceived when
one stabilizes and clarifies the mind can be experienced again and again in meditation
How do you train and how do you know that you are progressing in your training? -
Answer -- Training involves applying specific techniques to stabilize and clarify the
mind, and progress is indicated by the extent to which you can apply the instructions
- In addition, during training there are structured dialogues between the student and an
expert (teacher) to monitor the student's progress
- The teacher leads the dialogue, asking appropriate questions and allowing the subject
to describe his or her experience in detail
- In the Zen and in Tibetan Buddhist traditions, for instance, the student will from time to
time report about their meditative experiences to their teacher
- On the basis of these experiences, a qualified teacher will be able to appraise the
quality of the student's meditative practice and see whether it reflects genuine progress
or mere self-deceptions - and guide the student
Koans - Answer -- In the Rinzai school, koans are used to test a student's progress in
Zen practice - they are "riddles" that a student has to solve
- Ex. What is the sound of one hand clapping? What was the appearance of your face
before your ancestors were born?
- The obscure riddles, bewildering dialogues, and flagrant contradictions that form the
koans help the student ground their thinking in reality and break free of the conceptual
mind, i.e. the categorizing, analyzing ordinary thinking mind
,- This is related to the idea raised in the last lecture about potential limitations of the
"left-brain" logical self that suppresses more expansive right-brain consciousness
- All koans must be answered from within the realm of one's own personal experience
Koans Purpose - Answer -- Koans are meant to be pondered in mediation practice and
throughout the day til the answer opens the true heart of the question
- Traditionally, answers could not be found in books nor are the koans discussed with
other mediation practitioners
- Even if you somehow managed to find a "correct answer" sheathing is not really
possible, because each koan has many answers, both in terms of the actual verbal
response and the effects it produces on one's mind and emotions
- The answer to the koan is not in fact in the verbal response, but in how you are
responding
- Even the wisest Zen teacher cannot predict the right answer for a particular student
(though they can "see" if the student has the answer)
- You must find the answer for yourself, and it will not be an answer that your
conceptual mind can deduce
- Once experienced, the answer is often a life-changing experience, and comes with a
force that is self-validating - it needs no confirmation from anyone else
Koan Example - Answer -- So what is the sound of one hand clapping?
- Correct answer may be "Depends on what the hand is clapping against!"
demonstrating insight into yin and yang, the Gestalt, figure and ground
- Or it might be to face the questioner, assume an appropriate Buddhist posture, and
without a word, thrust one hand forward
- And how would you know when you've arrived at the right answer?
- The correct answer will induce an experience of kensho, a sudden flash of insight or
awakening, i.e. non dual consciousness, usually accompanied by bliss - this is in fact
the main purpose of koans
- Can conclusions drawn by contemplatives be verified by a third party?
- Only if the person has had training
- A similar process exists in science
, If you don't know much about physics and mathematics, then you being by trusting the
experts because you assume that they are reliable
You trust them because they agree among themselves after having carefully verified
each other's findings
However, you also know that if you were to train properly in their discipline then you
would be able to check all of this yourself
Meditation Masters - Answer -- Lastly, people within contemplative traditions generally
agree on the point of which meditation masters have achieved the highest levels of
realization
- This is similar to how there is generally conscience among the scientific community
regarding who the experts are
- It could be argued that these contemplatives are all deceiving themselves
- However, as Ricard says "It would be a bit strange if the whole cohort of people with
sharp acumen who have refined their introspective faculties to such an extent deluded
themselves in exactly the same way at various times in history and in various places"
- In addition, the contemplative approach supposedly works because it results in a clear
and stable mind
- Finding that long-term "super-meditators" are neurologically, as well as
psychologically, off-the-charts on measures of traits like attention, empathy, and
optimism would appear to support that claim
Neuropsychological Research on Long-Term Meditators - Answer -- EEG studies by
Richard Davidson found that mediation practice is associated with increased left
prefrontal activity
Left prefrontal activity is known to be associated with optimism and feelings of
happiness and well-being
Early on, Davidson noticed that an elderly Tibetan monk in one of his studies showed
much greater predominance of activity in the left prefrontal than any of the other
participants he had previously tested
Research on other long-term meditators provided further confirmatory evidence
For instance, one meditation adept, Matthieu Ricard, showed increased left prefrontal
cortical activity that was 4.5 standard deviations outside the standard bell curve
