Cognitive Metaparadigm Theory

A high-level theory about the nature of cognitive paradigms themselves. It classifies and analyzes the different possible kinds of models we can have for the mind—are they primarily computational, biological, phenomenological, or social? This meta-theory helps explain why cognitive scientists from different sub-fields often talk past each other; they're not just using different models, they're operating in different meta-frameworks about what a model of the mind should even look like.

Cognitive Metaparadigm Theory Example: The fierce debate between proponents of Classical Computationalism (the mind as a symbol processor) and Embodied Dynamical Systems (the mind as a body interacting with an environment) is a clash not just of paradigms, but of Cognitive Metaparadigms. One sees the mind as essentially like a computer program; the other sees it as essentially like a weather system or a walking gait.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Picking

The inherent, unconscious operation of the human brain to selectively attend to, remember, and process information that confirms existing beliefs, expectations, or emotional states (Confirmation Bias), while filtering out dissonant data. This is the biological and psychological root of all cherry-picking; our wetware is wired to be a prejudiced curator. We don't just pick facts; our perception itself is a picky editor.

Example: After buying a red Honda, you suddenly see red Hondas everywhere. This is Cognitive Picking. Your brain has tuned its perceptual filter to notice confirming instances (other red Hondas) while ignoring the thousands of other cars you pass. Your reality becomes a curated exhibit of your own recent choices.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Metabiases

Biases about biases themselves. These are systematic errors in how we perceive, judge, and attempt to correct for cognitive biases in ourselves and others. A key example is the Bias Blind Spot—the meta-bias of believing you are less biased than other people. Cognitive metabiases are why "knowing about biases" doesn't cure them; it often just gives you more sophisticated tools for self-deception.

Example: A CEO reads about groupthink and then vigilantly points it out in every team meeting, seeing dissent as healthy. However, they are blind to their own Cognitive Metabiases: their overconfidence bias in their ability to detect bias, and their reactance to any criticism, which they now dismiss as just "the team avoiding groupthink."

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Biases of Cognitive Biases

The specific, recursive set of errors we make when trying to identify, label, and correct cognitive biases. This includes: Bias Attribution Bias (attributing others' actions to their biases, but your own to circumstances), Fallacy Fallacy applied to biases (dismissing someone's point because you spotted a bias, even if their point is valid), and the "I'm Educated on Biases" Bias (assuming knowledge of bias lists makes you immune to them).

Cognitive Biases of Cognitive Biases Example: You accuse a friend of confirmation bias for only reading news that aligns with her politics. She retorts that your accusation is itself driven by fundamental attribution error (a Cognitive Bias). You then dismiss this as a tu quoque fallacy (a Fallacy Fallacy). This infinite regress of bias accusations is the hall of mirrors created by Cognitive Biases of Cognitive Biases.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Biases of Encyclopedia

The subconscious prejudices of the individual experts, editors, and fact-checkers who compile traditional encyclopedias. These include professional domain bias (a historian might over-emphasize political history over social history), cultural blind spots, and unconscious allegiance to disciplinary paradigms. These personal biases are harder to spot and challenge than on a wiki, as they are buried under the veneer of singular, anonymous authority.

Cognitive Biases of Encyclopedia Example: The editor overseeing the "Psychology" section of an encyclopedia, trained in strict behaviorism, minimizes the contributions of psychoanalysis or humanistic psychology, framing them as historical curiosities. This Cognitive Bias of Encyclopedia shapes the reader's entire understanding of the field, presenting one school of thought as the definitive narrative.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

NPOV Cognitive Bias

The mental error committed by Wikipedia editors who believe that by stripping language of overt emotion and attributing all claims, they have achieved personal objectivity. It is the cognitive bias of believing you have no bias because you are following the NPOV rulebook. This blinds editors to their own ideological assumptions about what constitutes a "reliable source" or a "significant" viewpoint worthy of inclusion.

Example: An editor meticulously ensures every statement about socialism is attributed to a critic or a proponent, believing this makes the article neutral. However, their NPOV Cognitive Bias prevents them from seeing that their selection of which critiques and which defenses to include is itself driven by their own liberal-capitalist worldview, shaping the narrative within a frame they mistake for a blank slate.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Metabiases of Wiki

Biases in how the Wikipedia community collectively thinks about the cognitive biases present in the wiki system. These are flawed assumptions or beliefs regarding the nature and remediation of bias on the platform. A prime example is the Bias Neutralization Fallacy: the belief that the collective, consensus-driven editing process inherently cancels out individual cognitive biases, akin to a "wisdom of the crowd" effect for truth. This metabias ignores how systemic biases (like contributor demographics) can be reinforced, not mitigated, by group consensus. Another is the Source Fetishism Metabias, where the community believes that any statement backed by a "reliable source" is therefore free from cognitive bias, ignoring the biases embedded within the media and academic publishing industries themselves.

Cognitive Metabiases of Wiki Example: When faced with criticism that Wikipedia's coverage of feminist theory is skewed, a longtime administrator responds, "Our NPOV policy and reliance on peer-reviewed journals correct for any individual editor's bias." This reflects a Cognitive Metabias of Wiki. They assume the process (policy + academic sourcing) is a perfect antidote to bias, failing to see that the pool of academic sources itself may have a systemic bias, and that the consensus of a homogenous editor pool can amplify, not correct, that skew.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026