I am merely raising issue with your unsupported claim.You too, since it seems you are simply picking up where she left off.
What bells wants to respond with is up to bells.
Don't assume that I am taking bells' position as my own, however, just because I have issue with you unsupporting a claim.
Whereas bells might be taking one position, and you another, I may well be in the "I don't know" position.
You have raised issue with bells not supporting a claim.
In doing so you raised an unsupported claim of your own.
To remind you:impossible?
what are you talking about?
I said the link supports that the claim is not evidenced.
You argued: "that there are many aspects of the totality of the human mind, conscious, and unconscious that are not reconcilable with a mere biological analysis of the brain as the only valid subject of investigation."
From which I said that if you had qualified by "are currently not reconcilable..." you would be correct.
But your statement implies impossibility - that they are not reconcilable. Period.
You have yet to address this claim with any support other than that they may not be currently reconcilable.
Being currently unreconcilable does not equate to not being possible to reconcile.
I have quoted several times your claim that I have raised issue with.WTF?
I claimed that cognitive psychology, by definition, doesn't deal with the biological functioning of the brain.
Because they are different schools of thought / method.
You have yet to support it.
You claimed that matters of the psyche are unreconcilable with biological analysis of the brain as the only line of investigation.
This is different than now saying that psychology does not address biological issues.
Just because psychology does not address biology (your admission) does not mean biology can not address matters of psychology (your previous claim) even if it currently doesn't.
I have read it.Once again, not sure what you are talking about in the name of impossibility ... or even that you have read the paragraph for that matter ...
Have you, beyond the "vs"?
Where does it say in that paragraph that cognitive science is incapable (now and forever) of establishing that which cognitive psychology currently establishes?
Neuroscience, work in artificial intelligence, to name but two.So feel free to explain what methods of cognitive science approach the topic of psyche.
The lines between the science and psychology are blurred, yet you dismiss them as if mutually exclusive with regard the psyche.
Perhaps this will help you realise that you have your eyes closed in this regard.
Is psychology the better method for examining psychological phenomena?
Sure.