0.1 How does the mind process information?  (Page 3/4)

However, how does a representation have an intention? A representation could be an idea - and in that case, the representation could have intentions attached. If the representation is a feeling it could also have intentions attached. An intention is a strong feeling - so it could be obvious that some representations have strong feelings or other thoughts attached.

Why do they need to even be labelled 'representations' then - I could just say that some ideas have stronger motivations and feelings attached than other ideas, and that some ideas form ideas or 'understandings' of other ideas that could be objects in the world or other concepts in the persons mind. However, when some object or idea is 'represented' as or in another idea or object in the mind it is called a meta-representation, or just a 'representation of another representation'.

So the term representation does have some use - because people represent things in the world that are happening all of the time. There is a difference then between the definition of an 'understanding' and a 'representation'. Humans could have understandings of anything basically, some of the stuff in the world is going to be represented in their mind as a single object, and other stuff is just going to be 'understood' as an 'understanding' to the person. 'Understandings' could involve multiple representations and 'understandings of understandings' could involve multiple meta-representations.

The important question then is - which components of our representations or understandings have strong feelings attached? That is what Dennett suggested by his distinction between 'florid' and 'pastel' representations. The word 'florid' by definition means elaborately or excessively intricate or complicated or excessive - so that makes it obvious that some feelings have components that are more motivated or salient.

The use of representations

Dennett also pointed out that there is knowing and a use to representations - if someone simply has a representation that is different from it being a practical representation. This is different from 'symbols' in my view because some symbols have a greater significance on the human psyche. That makes it seem simple - obviously different objects in the environment are going to have a greater psychological impact than other objects, and different objects are going to be represented differently.

Take is a step further and it becomes obvious that different mental constructs interact with each other within the mind. Mental constructs have been defined a long time ago - Carl Jung talked about mental constructs when discussing dreams and other significant psychological phenomena. I would think that much could be understood if it could be sorted out the different mental constructs - these are different from simply grouping ideas and subjects and experiences and 'understandings' in life into different categories - but the significance of each would need to also be understood.

The question then is - which subjects or categories or experiences could form a significant mental construct? Do different emotions form mental constructs? Can different thoughts or constructs be formed from significant life experiences and the emotions that these experiences generate? Then is it simply an emotional world that needs to be analyzed? If complex mental constructs can be formed it is certainly more complex than a few simple categories in life evoking certain emotions.