Cognitive Relativism

The view that all knowledge, concepts, and truths are constructed by the mind and are relative to the individual's or culture's perspective, framework, or conceptual scheme. There is no neutral, framework-independent way to check if our concepts "match" reality; we're always interpreting through a lens. Different frameworks create different, equally valid, cognitive realities.

Example: The concept of "justice." Cognitive relativism would argue there's no universal, mind-independent essence of justice. One culture's justice (restorative, community-based) is a fundamentally different cognitive construction than another's (retributive, individual-based). Neither is more "real"; they are products of different historical and social frameworks. Two people witnessing the same event (e.g., a political protest) will cognitively construct different events based on their pre-existing schemas.

by Abzugal January 24, 2026

Cognitive Determinism

The theory that our thoughts, beliefs, and even our conscious reasoning processes are determined by prior causes—our genetics, upbringing, culture, and past experiences—that shape our cognitive frameworks. You think what you think because of your cognitive programming; "changing your mind" is just the output of a deterministic process of new inputs interacting with old programming.

Example: You encounter a persuasive political argument. Cognitive determinism would say whether you find it convincing isn't a free evaluation of pure reason, but is predetermined by your existing ideological schema, the trust you have in the speaker (based on past experiences), and your social group's norms. Your "rational conclusion" was the only possible output given your cognitive starting conditions. Advertising works on this principle, aiming to deterministically rewire cognitive associations (Coca-Cola = happiness).

by Abzugal January 24, 2026

Hard Problem of Cognitive Sciences

The meta-problem of self-reference: Cognitive sciences (psychology, neuroscience, linguistics) use the human mind to study the human mind. This creates a loop where the instrument of investigation is the same as the object under investigation. The hard problem is that any model the mind produces about itself is necessarily incomplete and shaped by the very cognitive biases, limitations, and structures it's trying to map. It's like a camera trying to take a perfect picture of its own lens—the act of observation changes and is constrained by the apparatus. We can never get a "view from outside" of cognition.

Example: A neuroscientist uses an fMRI machine (designed and operated by human brains) to study which brain regions activate during decision-making. The conclusions of the study are then processed, understood, and believed by other human brains. The hard problem: The entire epistemic chain is made of "brain stuff." If human cognition is systematically flawed in some way, that flaw would be baked into the scientific methods, instruments, and interpretations, making it invisible to us. We are using a potentially faulty compiler to debug its own source code. Hard Problem of Cognitive Sciences.

by Enkigal January 24, 2026

Cognitive Slurs

Insulting terms that weaponize concepts from cognitive psychology to demean someone's thinking process as inherently defective. These slurs pathologize disagreement by diagnosing the opponent with a cognitive flaw (e.g., "You're just Dunning-Krugerandized," "That's pure cognitive dissonance," "Your confirmation bias is showing"). While these are real biases, using them as casual insults strips them of their scientific meaning and turns them into sophisticated ad hominem attacks. It's a way of saying "You're too stupid to know you're stupid" while pretending to be objective.

Example: In a political debate, Person A presents a statistic. Person B, disagreeing, doesn't engage with the data source but retorts, "You're just experiencing backfire effect; your fragile worldview can't handle facts." This slur allows Person B to claim the high ground of psychological insight while functionally calling Person A an irrational idiot. It psychologizes the disagreement, making productive discourse impossible because any counter-argument can be dismissed as further proof of the alleged bias. Cognitive Slurs.

by Dumuabzu January 25, 2026

Cognitive Bigotry

The prejudiced belief that one's own reasoning operates purely on logic and evidence, while the reasoning of those who disagree is fundamentally contaminated by cognitive biases, emotions, or lower evolutionary instincts. It is the failure to acknowledge the universality of cognitive biases—they affect everyone, including you. This bigotry creates a caste system of thinkers: the enlightened (us) who see reality clearly, and the deluded (them) who are slaves to heuristics. It ignores the role of values, experiences, and legitimate epistemological differences in shaping conclusions.

Example: A tech executive believes their support for radical life-extension technology is purely rational, based on cost-benefit analyses. They dismiss religious or ethical objections from bioconservatives as being driven by "status quo bias" and "yuck-factor emotionalism." This cognitive bigotry refuses to engage with the substantive philosophical arguments about human nature, destiny, and inequality, instead reducing all opposition to a catalog of cognitive errors. It mistakes one value system (utilitarian calculation) for the absence of bias. Cognitive Bigotry.

by Dumuabzu January 25, 2026