Narration, Navigation, and Non-Conscious Thought: Neuroscientific and Literary Approaches to the Thinking Body
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite difficulties in finding an adequate terminology, psychologists, cognitive scientists, and neuroscientists offer empirical evidence that the body thinks. Embodied cognition may be non-conscious rather than conscious, but it can influence conscious activity and initiate thought on its own. This paper works at the intersections of scientific research and narrative studies to probe the following questions: what is the use of cognitive functions if they are non-conscious, and how can bodily movements be detectors for such cognition at work? What processes prompt us to shift from one schematic organization to another, to change our patterns of thought? Beginning with Elizabeth Bowen's The Heat of the Day and studies of gesture's influence on learning, the paper then links neuroscientific theory, William James's theory of ‘percepts,’ and novels by Henry James. Interdisciplinary consensus suggests that the body's non-conscious strategies for spatial navigation activate similar schema for the navigation of mental space. Bodies may instigate shifts between way-finding strategies, enabling cognitive change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it