Model 2: A General Overview

Model 2 is a cognitive architecture, similar to SOAR, ACT-R and AlphaGo. A cognitive architecture refers to both a theory about the structure of the human mind and to a computational instantiation of such a theory, often used in the fields of artificial intelligence, neural networks and computational cognitive science.

What makes the Cognitive Typology Architecture (CTA) unique is that its architecture is being reverse engineered from an embodied cognition perspective, by examining the most normative features of human vultology across thousands of samples alongside their behavioral and cognitive correlates. This is speculated to produce a more faithful, human approximation of cognition than what other cognitive architectures have produced, due to its grounding in an element of human physiology.

Hypothesis

The model describes what it calls an object management system, which handles the way mental objects are represented and manipulated in our working memory. The way the model is reversed engineered from embodied expression is through what it calls the Action Abstraction Hypothesis, which states that the development of human language arose simultaneously alongside our capacity for infinite and "digital" symbolic representation (or abstract object recursion) and that this is intimately rooted in the repurposing of existing, motor-based circuits.

It states that pre-existing motor circuits were retooled, using neural recycling, to create this infinite abstract recursion. Consequently, abstract object management is connected with neural activation of certain motor regions, depending on the nature of the object-management being handled. For example, environment-independent visual search is activated alongside cognitive exploration of ideas due to this vestigial origin. Similarly, hand gesticulations have been shown to influence language comprehension, and an inhibition of gestures inhibits our linguistic capacity - showing the intimate tie between thoughts and actions.

Reverse Engineering

By holistically examining conversational expressions, which is essentially the activation of these abstract recursion, we observe four general categories of motion; proactive fluidity (PF), proactive rigidity (PR), reactive fluidity (RF) and reactive rigidity (RR). These four categories are proposed to be naturally occurring visual clusters, and are therefore non-arbitrary. Consequently, four main "modules" comprise the CTA, one for each of these naturally occurring visual clusters and the information it appears to handle.

The operations these modules handle are modelled as being: Procedural processing (PR), Information gathering (PF), Object Delineation (RR) and Temporal Contextualizing (RF). In conversation, humans appear to oscillate between these four visual expressions and their resulting cognitive operations, typically with a bias for one of these four visual clusters and its resulting cognition. This allows for a cognitive typology to be formed, giving us the name of the model. These four modules are modelled using pseudocode, giving us a very exact language for how they parse information and manipulate it.

Information Processing Styles

In addition to the biases for one of these four modules, we also see variants in the operations of these modules which are called information processing styles. These are vortical (V), modular (M), radial (R) and gravitic (G). Combined with the above module biases, we observe sixteen general cognitive typologies ("types") which can be traced back to embodied cognition.

Model 1 versus Model 2

Model 1 and Model 2 differ primarily in their method and precision of description. While Model 1 utilizes natural language to describe functions and types using adjectives like "impersonal" and "associative," Model 2 utilizes computer language to describe the functions and types using information processing operations.

There are inherent limitations to natural language adjectives that computer code does not possess. For example, words such as "associative" have many meanings a person can give them, based on what they understand by them. But in Model 2, associative can be defined mathematically as the intersection within a set, using set theory. This all but guarantees the elimination of equivocation of terms, which is a core issue facing mainstream typology. It also allows CT to be studied at a higher level of rigor that is acceptable for modern scientific standards and it places the theory firmly in the realm of cognitive science. It also allows for the possibility of its mainstream acceptance as an innovation in cognitive science research, should its postulates be verified with further experimentation.

What role does each model play?

That said, both Model 1 and Model 2 will continue to coexist in a feedback cycle; one is not meant to be a replacement of the other. It will always be necessary for people to talk to each other in natural language terms, not computer language. Therefore Model 1 will continue to act as a "translation" device in Cognitive Typology for how these computational insights play out on the ground and in the phenomenological experiences of real people.

Overview

The CTA is not yet finished, and will be the subject of an upcoming book. But the following drafts can help you get a rough picture of what the model describes:

• Cognitive Typology Architecture (CTA)
  • A Computational Metaphor PT1
  • A Computational Metaphor PT2
• The P Systems
  • Discrete & Continuous
  • Vortical (V) vs Modular (M)
• The J Systems
  • Gravitic (G) vs Radial (R)
  • Mechanistic & Teleological
• P+ (Pe)
  • P+ Information Gathering
  • P+ with a Visual Explanation
• J+ (Je)
  • J+ Procedural Processing
  • J+ with a Visual Explanation
• J- (Ji)
  • J- Definitional Processing
  • J- with a Visual Explanation
• P- (Pi)
  • P- Temporal Contextualizing
  • P- with a Visual Explanation
• V+ (Se)
  • V+ Actuality
  • V+ with a Visual Explanation
• V- (Ni)
  • V- Trans-Locality
  • V- with a Visual Explanation
• M+ (Ne)
  • M+ Potentiality
  • M+ with a Visual Explanation
• M- (Si)
  • M- Locality
  • M- with a Visual Explanation