Epistemology

The Sensory and Rational, Logical and Intuitive in Cognition

In the structure of cognition, a distinction is made between sensory and rational levels. At the sensory level, knowledge relies on data acquired through the senses: sight, hearing, touch, and so forth. These serve as the channels through which an individual interacts with the surrounding world. For many philosophers, particularly those aligned with empiricism, especially sensualism, sensory data forms the foundation of all knowledge and is the primary means of verifying theoretical constructs. Indeed, the sensory level is characterized by immediacy and intuitive conviction: what one has seen with their own eyes is perceived as an indisputable fact. However, this conviction can sometimes be misleading; for instance, the geocentric model might seem more convincing than the heliocentric one based solely on sensory experience. Furthermore, sensory experience cannot be regarded as wholly reliable, as it is susceptible to perceptual illusions and hallucinations. This has led some thinkers, such as the Eleatics and Plato, in antiquity to consider rational knowledge as superior and more trustworthy compared to sensory knowledge. With the advancement of technology, the claim regarding the immediacy of sensory data also requires refinement: in astronomy, for example, observations made through telescopes rely not solely on the capacity to see but also on theoretical concepts implemented in the construction of the telescope.

Ultimately, within the sensory level, one can observe varying degrees of cognitive processing of sensory data. The forms of sensory knowledge include sensation, perception, and imagination.

Sensation is the reflection of specific properties of objects within the psyche, resulting from direct stimulation of the senses. Sensation arises from the actions of sensory stimuli (visual, auditory, gustatory, etc.). For instance, a flash of light, a sound, or the sensation of heat or cold is captured at the level of sensation. The individual appears as a passive recipient, perceiving external stimuli. However, even at this level, passivity is not absolute. Imagine listening to a lecture while classmates whisper behind you. At the level of sensation, you undoubtedly register two streams of sound: the lecturer's words and the whispers of your classmates. If you focus on the lecture, the whispers become background noise that disrupts your listening. Conversely, if you catch something interesting in the whispers and begin to pay attention, the lecture then becomes the background noise. Notably, the volume of both the lecture and the whispers may remain unchanged, yet your attention can shift, amplifying some sensations while dampening others.

Psychology recognizes that training can increase or decrease sensitivity thresholds (i.e., the level of stimulus intensity at which sensation arises).

Perception is the holistic reflection of objects as a collection of their sensory properties. It forms through the combination of sensations into a unified image; for example, the image of a flower integrates certain shape, color, and scent. Perception already entails some structuring of the world. Both abstract and realistic paintings at the level of sensation present themselves as mere collections of colored patches. However, at the level of perception, a realistic painting appears as a landscape, still life, or portrait, while interpreting an abstract painting with the same ease is often elusive: for some, it may remain just a collection of patches, while others may discern a specific image, and the interpretations may significantly differ among viewers.

Imagination is a sensory image of an object that is not directly perceived. Imagination can be a recollection of a previously perceived object; for example, you might accurately remember the face of a friend who is not currently present with you. Since imagination does not involve the direct action of an object upon the senses, it allows for the creation of images of objects never perceived, such as mythical beings like mermaids or dragons.

In imagination, there is even more room for cognitive activity than in sensation or perception; the individual can be not only a recipient of sensory data but also a creator of images. Nevertheless, despite all cognitive processing, imagination remains a form of sensory level knowledge, as it operates with sensory images of objects.

In contrast, at the rational level of cognition, understanding relies on abstract thinking, which engages not with the sensory but with the conceptual representation of objects. The characteristics of abstract thinking include generality, mediation, and connection to language.

The rational level allows for the organization and categorization of sensory experience, enabling the comprehension of general patterns underlying specific phenomena given in sensory perception. It is this ability to create a comprehensive picture from concrete data and to recognize the underlying principles that some thinkers regard as the distinguishing feature of the rational level, considering it superior and more significant than the sensory.

The forms of thinking engaged at the rational level include concepts, judgments, and inferences.

A concept is a form of thought that reflects objects through a compilation of their essential characteristics. Unlike imagination, which is always concrete and reflects a specific object, a concept generalizes objects of a certain class. For example, if one tries to imagine an apple, they might picture a specific variety with a particular color and size. In contrast, the concept of "apple" encompasses traits characteristic of all apples—large and small, sour and sweet, and so forth. Moreover, a concept can represent objects that are difficult to visualize—such as a market economy, hope, or a square circle. Thus, a concept is an abstract representation that focuses solely on the essential attributes of an object.

A judgment is a form of thought that reveals the connection between an object and its attribute or the relationship between objects (for instance, "a university is a higher educational institution" or "English is more widespread in the world than German"). A judgment consists of concepts connected by logical conjunctions. In language, judgments are expressed in declarative sentences and constitute their meaning.

An inference is a form of thought that derives a new judgment from one or several existing judgments. This form of thinking encapsulates the process of reasoning, which involves deriving one thought from another according to the principles and laws of logic. In its simplest cases, an inference consists of two judgments, one of which is derived from the other (for example, knowing that all lawyers are legal practitioners allows one to conclude that anyone who is not a legal practitioner cannot be a lawyer). However, reasoning can often be more complex, forming chains of inferences.

In general, sensory knowledge of the singular is presented in a concrete-image form, while at the rational level, knowledge of the general, the lawful, emerges. At times, in the history of philosophy, these two levels have been opposed, emphasizing the superiority of one over the other while relegating the other to a supportive role. This was notably evident in the philosophy of the Modern era, in the confrontation between empiricism (which stressed the role of the sensory) and rationalism (which emphasized the role of the rational). Yet, each of these approaches proved to be one-sided, as revealed in the subsequent development of philosophy. For instance, Kant observed that reason cannot contemplate, while the senses cannot think. Indeed, effective cognition requires both experiential data obtained at the sensory level and their theoretical understanding that occurs at the rational level. Thus, in the process of cognition, these levels are inseparably linked, interacting and complementing one another.

Cognition is often viewed as a process governed by rational rules. Throughout the historical development of science, many guidelines have been accumulated, adherence to which aids in achieving reliable knowledge. However, despite the evident utility of such guidelines, reflected in scientific methodology, scientific discoveries arise not only from the application of known rational procedures but also from guesses, intuition, and insight. Thus, a question arises regarding the irrational factors in cognition. This can generally be termed the problem of the relationship between logic and intuition. Logic explores the forms of correct reasoning and the laws of their construction, serving as a means for the purely formal derivation of one thought from another. If cognition were solely constructed according to the laws and rules of logic, discoveries would resemble solutions to problems based on a pre-established algorithm, with new knowledge pre-programmed. However, real scientific inquiry rarely resembles this scenario. In contemplating a problem and formulating hypotheses, a scientist employs not only formal rules but also their professional intuition, which suggests promising avenues for exploration; the emergence of a new idea is often perceived not as a conclusion mechanically derived from known information but as an insight, a moment of sudden understanding. This phenomenon is observed not only in scientific problem-solving—recall instances when a brilliant solution to a complex issue or puzzle suddenly occurred to you. In contrast to routine tasks (such as solving an equation whose algorithm you have mastered), finding an answer to an unconventional question likely manifests as an instantaneous insight rather than a precise sequence of steps. In these instances, intuition comes into play—an immediate grasp, a certain "aha" moment, when truth is "captured" in its entirety, devoid of justification and deduction.

Upon a more detailed examination of intuition, several of its aspects can be discerned. Intuitive decision-making is sometimes linked to rapid perception or abbreviated reasoning, where a conclusion is reached through a condensed thought process, in which the individual does not fully engage with all the connections. This occurs through a certain degree of automatism; for instance, one might not immediately calculate the precise sum of 832 and 987, but can instantly recognize that it will be less than 2000. Another aspect is associated with clarity; in this sense, René Descartes used the term "intuition" to denote knowledge that is so clear and distinct that it admits no doubt. However, this approach conflates psychological clarity with demonstrable proof. Subsequent developments in psychology have revealed that what seems obvious can sometimes be misleading. This is especially important to consider, given that for a subject, the persuasiveness of an obvious proposition is often more significant than appeals to external evidence, such as logical reasoning or references to facts.

Another understanding of intuition relates to creative imagination and fantasy, which cannot be reduced to rational principles. This notion of intuition is most commonly encountered in the arts, though it is also present in the search for original solutions in science. Ultimately, intuition may be associated with common sense and practical wisdom, enabling one to sense a promising direction for research or to identify an important problem.

All these aspects illustrate that while intuition cannot be reduced to a set of rational rules, it is not entirely irrational either. The history of science attests to the fact that discoveries which initially appear to result from random conjecture were, in reality, the outcome of intensive prior work. One of the most prevalent approaches to analyzing the creative process suggests that the pursuit of extraordinary solutions comprises four stages: preparation (defining the problem and working on it), incubation (subconscious work on the task while consciousness is diverted to something else), insight (a sudden realization or awareness of the solution), and verification. In this framework, intuition manifests most vividly during the insight stage; however, for an insight to occur, prior work—often lengthy and demanding—is required. Moreover, subsequent verification of the conjecture is essential, as many ideas that initially seem promising can, upon examination, prove to be erroneous.

Another example of intuition relying on a rational foundation is the phenomenon of "professional instinct" among researchers, which guides them in their inquiries. Although this instinct is deemed intuitive, it is shaped by prior education and experience in a specific field. The professional instinct of an experienced researcher often proves to be significantly more accurate and effective than that of a novice.

While intuition is indispensable in generating new ideas, not all such ideas ultimately prove to be valid. For research outcomes to transform into credible knowledge, rational verification procedures are necessary. At this stage, the exposition of the research takes on a purely rational character. Therefore, the relationship between logic and intuition can be summarized as follows: intuition plays a vital role in making discoveries and formulating new theories, whereas logic is crucial during their verification and substantiation.