Editing Thought (section)

==In various disciplines==
===Phenomenology===
[[Phenomenology (philosophy)|Phenomenology]] is the science of the structure and contents of [[experience]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Smith |first1=David Woodruff |title=Phenomenology: 1. What is Phenomenology? |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/#WhatPhen |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=20 September 2021 |date=2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Smith |first1=Joel |title=Phenomenology |url=https://iep.utm.edu/phenom/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=10 October 2021}}</ref> The term "cognitive phenomenology" refers to the experiential character of thinking or what it feels like to think.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="HansenCognitive"/><ref name="Kriegel">{{cite book |last1=Kriegel |first1=Uriah |title=Phenomenology of Thinking |date=2015 |location=London and New York |publisher=Routledge |pages=25–43 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/KRITCO-10 |chapter=The Character of Cognitive Phenomenology}}</ref><ref name="Crowell"/><ref name="Carruthers">{{cite book |last1=Carruthers |first1=Peter |last2=Veillet |first2=Bénédicte |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957993-8 |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001/acprof-9780199579938-chapter-2 |chapter=The Case Against Cognitive Phenomenology}}</ref> Some theorists claim that there is no distinctive cognitive phenomenology. On such a view, the experience of thinking is just one form of sensory experience.<ref name="Carruthers"/><ref name="Prinz"/><ref name="Levine"/> According to one version, thinking just involves hearing a voice internally.<ref name="Prinz"/> According to another, there is no experience of thinking apart from the indirect effects thinking has on sensory experience.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="HansenCognitive"/> A weaker version of such an approach allows that thinking may have a distinct phenomenology but contends that thinking still depends on sensory experience because it cannot occur on its own. On this view, sensory contents constitute the foundation from which thinking may arise.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="Prinz">{{cite book |last1=Prinz |first1=Jesse J. |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957993-8 |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001/acprof-9780199579938-chapter-8 |chapter=The Sensory Basis of Cognitive Phenomenology 1}}</ref><ref name="Levine">{{cite book |last1=Levine |first1=Joseph |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957993-8 |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001/acprof-9780199579938-chapter-5 |chapter=On the Phenomenology of Thought}}</ref>

An often-cited [[thought experiment]] in favor of the existence of a distinctive cognitive phenomenology involves two persons listening to a radio broadcast in French, one who understands French and the other who does not.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="HansenCognitive"/><ref name="Kriegel"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Siewert |first1=Charles |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957993-8 |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001/acprof-9780199579938-chapter-11 |chapter=Phenomenal Thought}}</ref> The idea behind this example is that both listeners hear the same sounds and therefore have the same non-cognitive experience. In order to explain the difference, a distinctive cognitive phenomenology has to be posited: only the experience of the first person has this additional cognitive character since it is accompanied by a thought that corresponds to the meaning of what is said.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="HansenCognitive">{{cite web |last1=Hansen |first1=Mette Kristine |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |url=https://iep.utm.edu/cog-phen/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=17 October 2021}}</ref><ref name="Kriegel"/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pitt |first1=David |title=The Phenomenology of Cognition: Or What Is It Like to Think That P? |journal=Philosophy and Phenomenological Research |date=2004 |volume=69 |issue=1 |pages=1–36 |doi=10.1111/j.1933-1592.2004.tb00382.x |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/PITWII}}</ref> Other arguments for the experience of thinking focus on the direct introspective access to thinking or on the thinker's knowledge of their own thoughts.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="HansenCognitive"/><ref name="Kriegel"/>

Phenomenologists are also concerned with the characteristic features of the experience of thinking. Making a judgment is one of the prototypical forms of cognitive phenomenology.<ref name="Kriegel"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Smith |first1=David Woodruff |title=Cognitive Phenomenology |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957993-8 |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579938.001.0001/acprof-9780199579938-chapter-15 |chapter=The Phenomenology of Consciously Thinking}}</ref> It involves epistemic agency, in which a proposition is entertained, evidence for and against it is considered, and, based on this reasoning, the proposition is either affirmed or rejected.<ref name="Kriegel"/> It is sometimes argued that the experience of truth is central to thinking, i.e. that thinking aims at representing how the world is.<ref name="Crowell"/><ref name="HansenCognitive"/> It shares this feature with perception but differs from it in the way how it represents the world: without the use of sensory contents.<ref name="Crowell"/>

One of the characteristic features often ascribed to thinking and judging is that they are predicative experiences, in contrast to the [[pre-predicative experience]] found in immediate perception.<ref name="Dastur">{{cite book |last1=Dastur |first1=Françoise |last2=Vallier |first2=Robert |title=Questions of Phenomenology |date=2017 |publisher=Fordham University Press |isbn=978-0-8232-3373-1 |url=https://www.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.5422/fordham/9780823233731.001.0001/upso-9780823233731-chapter-003 |chapter=The Problem of Pre-Predicative Experience: Husserl|doi=10.5422/fordham/9780823233731.001.0001 |s2cid=148619048 }}</ref><ref name="Staiti">{{cite book |last1=Staiti |first1=Andrea |editor1-first=Dan |editor1-last=Zahavi |title=Pre-Predicative Experience and Life-World |date= 2018 |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755340.013.12 |isbn=978-0-19-875534-0 |url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755340.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780198755340-e-12 |language=en}}</ref> On such a view, various aspects of perceptual experience resemble judgments without being judgments in the strict sense.<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="Diaz">{{cite journal |last1=Diaz |first1=Emiliano |title=Transcendental Anticipation: A Reconsideration of Husserl's Type and Kant's Schemata |journal=Husserl Studies |date=2020 |volume=36 |issue=1 |pages=1–23 |doi=10.1007/s10743-019-09249-3 |s2cid=203547989 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/DIATAA-4}}</ref><ref name="Doyon"/> For example, the perceptual experience of the front of a house brings with it various expectations about aspects of the house not directly seen, like the size and shape of its other sides. This process is sometimes referred to as [[apperception]].<ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="Diaz"/> These expectations resemble judgments and can be wrong. This would be the case when it turns out upon walking around the "house" that it is no house at all but only a front facade of a house with nothing behind it. In this case, the perceptual expectations are frustrated and the perceiver is surprised.<ref name="Breyer"/> There is disagreement as to whether these pre-predicative aspects of regular perception should be understood as a form of cognitive phenomenology involving thinking.<ref name="Breyer"/> This issue is also important for understanding the relation between thought and language. The reason for this is that the pre-predicative expectations do not depend on language, which is sometimes taken as an example for non-linguistic thought.<ref name="Breyer"/> Various theorists have argued that pre-predicative experience is more basic or fundamental since predicative experience is in some sense built on top of it and therefore depends on it.<ref name="Doyon">{{cite book |last1=Doyon |first1=Maxime |title=Phenomenology of Thinking |date=2015 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-315-69773-4 |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315697734-10/structure-intentional-experience-husserl-heidegger-maxime-doyon?context=ubx |chapter=The "As-Structure" of Intentional Experience in Husserl and Heidegger|pages=122–139 |doi=10.4324/9781315697734-10 }}</ref><ref name="Dastur"/><ref name="Staiti"/>

Another way how phenomenologists have tried to distinguish the experience of thinking from other types of experiences is in relation to ''empty intentions'' in contrast to ''intuitive intentions''.<ref name="Hopp">{{cite book |last1=Hopp |first1=Walter |title=Phenomenology of Thinking |date=2015 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-315-69773-4 |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315697734-6/empty-intentions-phenomenological-character-defense-inclusivism-walter-hopp |chapter=Empty Intentions and Phenomenological Character: A Defense of Inclusivism|pages=50–67 |doi=10.4324/9781315697734-6 }}</ref><ref name="Spear">{{cite web |last1=Spear |first1=Andrew D. |title=Husserl, Edmund: Intentionality and Intentional Content: 2ai Act-Character |url=https://iep.utm.edu/huss-int/#SSH2ai |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=26 October 2021}}</ref> In this context, "intention" means that some kind of object is experienced. In ''intuitive intentions'', the object is presented through sensory contents. ''Empty intentions'', on the other hand, present their object in a more abstract manner without the help of sensory contents.<ref name="Hopp"/><ref name="Breyer"/><ref name="Spear"/> So when perceiving a sunset, it is presented through sensory contents. The same sunset can also be presented non-intuitively when merely thinking about it without the help of sensory contents.<ref name="Spear"/> In these cases, the same properties are ascribed to objects. The difference between these modes of presentation concerns not what properties are ascribed to the presented object but how the object is presented.<ref name="Hopp"/> Because of this commonality, it is possible for representations belonging to different modes to overlap or to diverge.<ref name="Crowell"/> For example, when searching one's glasses one may think to oneself that one left them on the kitchen table. This empty intention of the glasses lying on the kitchen table are then intuitively fulfilled when one sees them lying there upon arriving in the kitchen. This way, a perception can confirm or refute a thought depending on whether the empty intuitions are later fulfilled or not.<ref name="Crowell"/><ref name="Spear"/>

===Metaphysics===
The [[mind–body problem]] concerns the explanation of the relationship that exists between [[mind]]s, or mental processes, and bodily states or processes.<ref name="Kim1">{{cite book |last=Kim |first=J. |editor=Honderich, Ted |title=Problems in the Philosophy of Mind. Oxford Companion to Philosophy |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hond |url-access=registration |year=1995 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-866132-0 }}<!--Kim, J., "Problems in the Philosophy of Mind". ''[[Oxford Companion to Philosophy]]''. Ted Honderich (ed.) Oxford:Oxford University Press. 1995.--></ref> The main aim of philosophers working in this area is to determine the nature of the mind and mental states/processes, and how—or even if—minds are affected by and can affect the body.

Human perceptual experiences depend on [[stimulation|stimuli]] which arrive at one's various [[sensory system|sensory organs]] from the external world and these stimuli cause changes in one's mental state, ultimately causing one to feel a sensation, which may be pleasant or unpleasant. Someone's desire for a slice of pizza, for example, will tend to cause that person to move his or her body in a specific manner and in a specific direction to obtain what he or she wants. The question, then, is how it can be possible for conscious experiences to arise out of a lump of gray matter endowed with nothing but electrochemical properties. A related problem is to explain how someone's [[propositional attitude]]s (e.g. beliefs and desires) can cause that individual's [[neuron]]s to fire and his muscles to contract in exactly the correct manner. These comprise some of the puzzles that have confronted [[epistemologist]]s and philosophers of mind from at least the time of [[René Descartes]].<ref>''Companion to Metaphysics'', By Jaegwon Kim, [[Gary S. Rosenkrantz]], Ernest Sosa, Contributor Jaegwon Kim, 2nd ed., Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, {{ISBN|978-1-4051-5298-3}}</ref>

The above reflects a classical, functional description of how we work as cognitive, thinking systems. However the apparently irresolvable mind–body problem is said to be overcome, and bypassed, by the [[embodied cognition]] approach, with its roots in the work of [[Heidegger]], [[Jean Piaget|Piaget]], [[Vygotsky]], [[Merleau-Ponty]] and the pragmatist [[John Dewey]].<ref>Varela, Francisco J., Thompson, Evan T., and Rosch, Eleanor. (1992). ''The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience''. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. {{ISBN|0-262-72021-3}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Cowart |first=Monica |year=2004 |title=Embodied Cognition |encyclopedia=The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |issn= 2161-0002 |url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/embodcog/ |access-date= 27 February 2012}}</ref>

This approach states that the classical approach of separating the mind and analysing its processes is misguided: instead, we should see that the mind, actions of an embodied agent, and the environment it perceives and envisions, are all parts of a whole which determine each other. Therefore, functional analysis of the mind alone will always leave us with the mind–body problem which cannot be solved.<ref>{{cite web |author=Di Paolo, Ezequiel|title= Shallow and Deep Embodiment|publisher= University of Sussex|date= 2009 |format=Video, duration: 1:11:38 |url=https://cast.switch.ch/vod/clips/74nrkbwys |access-date=27 February 2012}}</ref>

===Psychology===
{{Main|Cognitive psychology}}
[[File:Thinking২.jpg|thumb|Man thinking on a train journey]]

Psychologists have concentrated on thinking as an intellectual exertion aimed at finding an answer to a question or the solution of a practical problem. Cognitive psychology is a branch of [[psychology]] that investigates internal mental processes such as problem solving, memory, and language; all of which are used in thinking. The school of thought arising from this approach is known as [[cognitivism (psychology)|cognitivism]], which is interested in how people mentally represent information processing. It had its foundations in the [[Gestalt psychology]] of [[Max Wertheimer]], [[Wolfgang Köhler]], and [[Kurt Koffka]],<ref>''Gestalt Theory'', By Max Wertheimer. Hayes Barton Press, 1944, {{ISBN|978-1-59377-695-4}}</ref> and in the work of [[Jean Piaget]], who provided a theory of stages/phases that describes children's cognitive development.

Cognitive psychologists use [[psychophysics|psychophysical]] and experimental approaches to understand, diagnose, and solve problems, concerning themselves with the mental processes which mediate between stimulus and response. They study various aspects of thinking, including the [[psychology of reasoning]], and how people make decisions and choices, solve problems, as well as engage in creative discovery and imaginative thought. Cognitive theory contends that solutions to problems either take the form of [[algorithm]]s: rules that are not necessarily understood but promise a solution, or of [[heuristics]]: rules that are understood but that do not always guarantee solutions. [[Cognitive science]] differs from cognitive psychology in that algorithms that are intended to simulate human behavior are implemented or implementable on a computer. In other instances, solutions may be found through insight, a sudden awareness of relationships.

In [[developmental psychology]], [[Jean Piaget]] was a pioneer in the study of the development of thought from birth to maturity. In his [[theory of cognitive development]], thought is based on actions on the environment. That is, Piaget suggests that the environment is understood through assimilations of objects in the available schemes of action and these accommodate to the objects to the extent that the available schemes fall short of the demands. As a result of this interplay between assimilation and accommodation, thought develops through a sequence of stages that differ qualitatively from each other in mode of representation and complexity of inference and understanding. That is, thought evolves from being based on perceptions and actions at the sensorimotor stage in the first two years of life to internal representations in early childhood. Subsequently, representations are gradually organized into logical structures which first operate on the concrete properties of the reality, in the stage of concrete operations, and then operate on abstract principles that organize concrete properties, in the stage of formal operations.<ref>Piaget, J. (1951). ''Psychology of Intelligence''. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul</ref> In recent years, the Piagetian conception of thought was integrated with information processing conceptions. Thus, thought is considered as the result of mechanisms that are responsible for the representation and processing of information. In this conception, [[cognitive processing speed|speed of processing]], [[cognitive control]], and [[working memory]] are the main functions underlying thought. In the [[neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development]], the development of thought is considered to come from increasing speed of processing, enhanced [[cognitive control]], and increasing working memory.<ref>{{cite book |last=Demetriou |first=A. |year=1998 |title=Cognitive development. In A. Demetriou, W. Doise, K. F. M. van Lieshout (Eds.), ''Life-span developmental psychology''. pp. 179–269. London: Wiley }}</ref>

[[Positive psychology]] emphasizes the positive aspects of human psychology as equally important as the focus on mood disorders and other negative symptoms. In ''[[Character Strengths and Virtues]]'', [[Christopher Peterson (psychologist)|Peterson]] and [[Martin Seligman|Seligman]] list a series of positive characteristics. One person is not expected to have every strength, nor are they meant to fully capsulate that characteristic entirely. The list encourages positive thought that builds on a person's strengths, rather than how to "fix" their "symptoms".<ref>{{cite book |last=Schacter |first=Daniel L. |year=2011 |title =Psychology |edition=Second |chapter=Positive Psychology |location=New York |publisher=Worth}} 584 pp.</ref>

===Psychoanalysis===
{{Main|Id, ego and super-ego|Unconscious mind}}
The "id", "ego" and "super-ego" are the three parts of the "[[psychic apparatus]]" defined in [[Sigmund Freud]]'s [[ego psychology|structural model]] of the psyche; they are the three theoretical constructs in terms of whose activity and interaction mental life is described. According to this model, the uncoordinated instinctual trends are encompassed by the "id", the organized realistic part of the psyche is the "ego", and the critical, moralizing function is the "super-ego".<ref>{{cite book |title=Teach Yourself Freud |first= Ruth |last=Snowden |edition= illustrated |publisher=McGraw-Hill |year=2006 |isbn= 978-0-07-147274-6 |page=107 }}</ref>

For psychoanalysis, the unconscious does not include all that is not conscious, rather only what is actively repressed from conscious thought or what the person is averse to knowing consciously. In a sense this view places the self in relationship to their unconscious as an adversary, warring with itself to keep what is unconscious hidden. If a person feels pain, all he can think of is alleviating the pain. Any of his desires, to get rid of pain or enjoy something, command the mind what to do. For Freud, the unconscious was a repository for socially unacceptable ideas, wishes or desires, traumatic memories, and painful emotions put out of mind by the mechanism of [[psychological repression]]. However, the contents did not necessarily have to be solely negative. In the psychoanalytic view, the unconscious is a force that can only be recognized by its effects—it expresses itself in the [[symptom]].<ref>''The Cambridge companion to Freud'', By Jerome Neu. Cambridge University Press, 1991, p. 29, {{ISBN|978-0-521-37779-9}}</ref>

The [[collective unconscious]], sometimes known as collective subconscious, is a term of [[analytical psychology]], [[Neologism|coined]] by [[Carl Jung]]. It is a part of the [[unconscious mind]], shared by a [[society]], a people, or all [[human]]ity, in an interconnected system that is the product of all common experiences and contains such concepts as [[science]], [[religion]], and [[morality]]. While [[Freud]] did not distinguish between "individual psychology" and "collective psychology", Jung distinguished the collective unconscious from the [[personal unconscious|personal]] [[unconscious mind|subconscious]] particular to each human being. The collective unconscious is also known as "a reservoir of the experiences of our species".<ref>Jensen, Peter S., Mrazek, David, Knapp, Penelope K., [[Laurence Steinberg|Steinberg, Laurence]], Pfeffer, Cynthia, Schowalter, John, & Shapiro, Theodore. (Dec 1997) "Evolution and revolution in child psychiatry: ADHD as a disorder of adaptation. (attention-deficit hyperactivity syndrome)". ''Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry''. 36. p. 1672. (10). July 14, 2007.</ref>

In the "Definitions" chapter of Jung's [[wikt:seminal|seminal]] work ''Psychological Types'', under the definition of "collective" Jung references ''representations collectives'', a term coined by [[Lucien Lévy-Bruhl]] in his 1910 book ''How Natives Think''. Jung says this is what he describes as the collective unconscious. Freud, on the other hand, did not accept the idea of a collective unconscious.