Search Results
6/17/2025, 12:12:27 AM
>>16699212
You have a good start for some exploration in cognitive science, however you need to tie things into other established sources as much as you can while making clear connections.
For instance, it's one thing to talk about schizophrenia and it's an entirely other thing to understand and reference the literature on it such that subject matter experts will acknowledge it.
Ironically, this is congruent to the problem of schizophrenia, where an individual might express an internally consistent logic yet fail to ground it within any tried-and-true understanding of the relevant phenomena.
As far as the gist of the paper goes there's nothing egregious about the ideas. Jung et. al. are a great way to get motivation and develop interesting frameworks. But again, the burden is on you to validate them as pragmatic and not internet schizo tier. You do that but showing that you built it on others work and that others can build their work on yours.
You have a good start for some exploration in cognitive science, however you need to tie things into other established sources as much as you can while making clear connections.
For instance, it's one thing to talk about schizophrenia and it's an entirely other thing to understand and reference the literature on it such that subject matter experts will acknowledge it.
Ironically, this is congruent to the problem of schizophrenia, where an individual might express an internally consistent logic yet fail to ground it within any tried-and-true understanding of the relevant phenomena.
As far as the gist of the paper goes there's nothing egregious about the ideas. Jung et. al. are a great way to get motivation and develop interesting frameworks. But again, the burden is on you to validate them as pragmatic and not internet schizo tier. You do that but showing that you built it on others work and that others can build their work on yours.
Page 1