Rock Stars of Cognitive Sciences Gather for a Symposium at the University of Latvia

Differences in views This year’s event was organised by concepts and perception researchers Edouard Machery, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh (USA) and Jesse Prinz, a professor at the City University of New York (USA). When asked to comment on the topicality of the symposium topic before its beginning, Professor Machery pointed out that concepts are knowledge structures used to classify objects and events, understand words, create analogies and perform other tasks; as such, they form the core of cognition. In addition, one of the key aims of cognitive sciences is to develop an understanding of concepts—an issue psychologists have been trying to tackle for several decades. The purpose of this symposium, however, was to act as a platform for discussing several competing theories explaining concepts. Professor Prinz stressed the importance of researching concepts in cognitive sciences and emphasised that concepts are ‘mental instruments that help us understand the world’.  When asked if it is necessary to research human perception, Professor Machery noted that perception is the basic feature of cognition and it plays a key role in the way people interact with the world. Although the influence of concepts on our perception has been evidenced by several psychological experiment results, Machery regards them as contentious. The professor also pointed out that the significance of these findings was discussed during the symposium. Professor Prinz, however, supports the view that concepts play a decisive role in our perception processes. He exemplifies this with the connection between language and colour perception. For example, languages with a larger number of generic colour terms (such as Russian) have an impact on colour perception. Comments by both scientists reveal fundamental differences in their views on concepts and perception, such as patterns of concept development, the existence of concepts that do not depend on perception and the role of concepts in perception processes. Robert Goldstone’s lecture On 15 May, a day before the official symposium opening, one of the world’s leading perception researchers, Indiana University Professor Robert Goldstone (USA), delivered an introductory lecture. Entitled The Pros and Cons of Perceptual Learning, the lecture gathered representatives of various spheres of science, and gave rise to a large number of questions that Goldstone gladly continued to answer even after the end of the lecture. In his lecture, Goldstone outlined the principles of perception, as well as the exciting differences in the perception of an expert or beginner in any field. This aspect is directly related to new concept or knowledge structure acquisition. Goldstone’s ideas encouraged the audience to consider and ask questions about social categorisation, for example, if the mentioned perception principles function on the social level, within psychic processes, dreams and elsewhere. Interdisciplinary cooperation The symposium opened with a lecture by University of Edinburgh Professor Andy Clark (UK), entitled Perceiving as Predicting. Based on empirical examples, the lecture was devoted to the connection between perception and our prediction abilities, as well as the ways in which these abilities stimulate our cognitive processes. The next two days of the symposium were organised into four parallel sections managed by representatives from cognitive sciences, philosophy, psychology and other sectors of science. Among them Connecticut University Professor Ruth Millikan (USA), Louisiana State University Professor John Protevi (USA), Rotterdam University Professor Diane Pecher (the Netherlands), Rice University professor Casey O’Callaghan (USA), Technical University of Bari Researcher Guido Sechi (Italy), University of Latvia Professor Ivars Austers and others. The speakers chosen by the scientific committee of the symposium represent 18 countries, and their reports pursue different approaches to the symposium topic. As a result, discussions between section leaders and speakers turned out particularly interesting. Talks between Professor O’Callaghan and Professor Millikan with their respective section participants is of particular note. The speakers, meanwhile, had a chance to make new contacts and receive expert advice.  After a pause of several years, the scientific committee accepted a paper by a Latvian researcher; this time, an excellent report on the perception of letters developed by Ieva Timrote and her colleagues at the UL Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. Overall, the symposium participants had a chance to communicate with leading cognitive scientists, discuss current developments in the field of cognitive sciences, share theoretical and empirical experience, as well as discover new research directions and find research partners. Key figures of cognitive sciences come together The invited speakers shared their insights into concept and perception-related issues with Professor Millikan presenting a referential language meaning theory and Alva Noë, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley (USA), explaining his view of concepts as techniques or practical skills. Professor Goldstone described the principles that guide our perception and explained how they are used in everyday problem-solving situations (e.g. when dealing with a mathematical task). Goldstone also addressed ways of hacking perception systems to improve our cognition, and provided empirical examples proving that people constantly develop ways of improving their cognition. The lecture by David Chalmers, a professor of the Australian National University and visiting professor of the New York University (USA), attracted a diverse audience. Those who wished to interview the zombie fan and rock-star status scientist had to line up in a queue. Chalmers’ report focused on the relationship between the real world and our perception, which he illustrated with witty and exciting thought experiments. One of the symposium organisers, associate professor and Director of the UL Centre for Cognitive Sciences and Semantics, Jurģis Šķilters, emphasised that this is the largest event organised over the period of nine years. He also noted that issues relating to the interaction between knowledge and perception have been regarded from both a theoretical and empirical viewpoint. ‘The symposium gathered cognitive science theoreticians and key figures of empirical cognitive sciences. As pointed out by several delegates, this symposium was one of very few events attended by so many leading figures of cognitive sciences with such different views, among them psychologist Goldstone, philosopher Millikan, as well as leading cognitive scientists Andy Clark and David Chalmers,’ added Šķilters. Features characteristic of the perception of art ‘For me, the symposium was an opportunity to meet Professor Jesse Prinz. I was especially glad to meet Professor Prinz in person, since I had followed his research activities into the perception of art and cited his ideas in my study papers. During the symposium, I came to the conclusion that Prinz’s contribution is mostly related to a renewed interest in ethical issues and the renaissance of ethics in philosophy, especially, experimental philosophy, and on a larger scale, in cognitive sciences,’ says Līva Raita, a 1^st-year MA student of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Latvia. When asked to point out current developments in the field of research relating to the perception of art, Prinz mentioned judgement research in cognitive sciences that starts with morality issues: How do we form a moral judgement? How do we decide whether something is good or bad? Prinz added the following: judgement relates also to the perception of art; therefore, it is relevant to study whether we judge works of art as good or bad. The professor also stressed a number of other key issues, e.g. do we use laws in deciding whether a work of art is good or bad, are these laws universal, what is more influential in making an aesthetic judgement—mind or emotions? In case of the latter, which emotions are of particular significance? All of these aspects lie at the focus of perception research. Prinz added that research into the perception of art is an emerging field, and the biggest discoveries are yet to be made. Impact on judgements Explaining his view on the perception of art and design, Prinz made a confident distinction between ‘high art’ (painting, sculpture, graphic arts) and design. He argued that, if viewed in broader terms, aesthetics has a set of fundamental judgements relating to the attractiveness of design, other people (we recognise some people as good-looking), and artistic achievements. He suggests that the difference lies in the emotional aspects as the emotions relating to judgements of both fields differ. As opposed to design, an artistic experience is not always connected with something pleasant. Prinz pointed out that ‘A certain portion of the great art is very touching and exciting. We watch tragedies in the theatre, horror films. Alarming topics, such as crucifixion scenes, torment and cruelty are featured in paintings and sculptures as well, and it is important to understand that all art evokes a positive reaction of a kind, when we consider it good. Otherwise, it would not attract our attention and we would not seek it out. Art is a source of positive emotions, but it is not a source of pleasant emotions. The difference between design and aesthetic achievement in art lies in the fact that design is more closely related to pleasantness and attractiveness; sexual arousal is important as well, but the fundamental question regarding art is this: what is the positive emotion that is not pleasure or arousal? One of the things I am interested to investigate is the idea that an aesthetic reaction is connected with astonishment. There are other related words, such as reverence, the sublime, the wonderful, stunning or amazing. These words relate to the unorthodox. I believe that reaction to art is the recognition of the unknown.’ Prinz illustrated these seemingly intuitive and obvious conclusions with surprising research findings, e.g. that fear makes people perceive art as more sublime. Asked to elaborate on these experiments, Prinz revealed that they deal with the use of informational priming methodology. For example, experiment participants are provided with various types of information about an artist (e.g. a good man, has saved the lives of several people, or on the contrary, an evil man, a dictator), or his status (e.g. an excellent artist, a beginner, an art student). Afterwards, the participants are asked to give their opinion about works of art produced by that artist These experiments deal with the essential aspect of the interpretation of art, which is exciting, in addition to art, in literature and, other humanities, as well as social sciences (including communication). At the end of the symposium, the participants expressed gratitude to the University of Latvia and symposium organisers for their successful efforts in organising such a large-scale event and attracting the excellent cognitive scientists. Translated by students of the professional study programme Translator of the University of Latvia.