The Limitations of Reason or the Limitations of the Paradigm? Toward an Interdisciplinary Architecture for Reinterpreting the Question of Modern Knowledge

Abstract

This article reformulates a classical epistemological question that has long remained at the intersection of the philosophy of mind, the philosophy of science, and contemporary cognitive studies. When human beings encounter the limits of their knowledge, when a well-established theory collapses, or when a scientific model fails to explain certain phenomena, an urgent question arises: Is this due to a limitation inherent in the structure of the human mind itself, or to deficiencies in the models and representations that it produces and operates with?

Drawing on a critical and synthetic reading of the literature of modern epistemology and interdisciplinary studies, the article distinguishes between three types of epistemic limits: limits of representation (the possibility of constructing accurate theories that exceed intuitive capacities), limits of intuitive understanding (the inability to internally comprehend certain representations), and limits of practice (contextual, historical, and social constraints). The study advances the argument that much of what is attributed to the “limitations of the mind” is in fact a limitation of modelling frameworks, of the normative horizon that conditions the possibility of experience, and of the network of relations between natural and artificial systems through which knowledge is actually produced.

The article then proceeds to examine scientific models as constructed epistemological tools subject to design decisions that enable certain questions to be asked while neglecting others. It warns against the “illusion of understanding” that arises from mastering a model’s internal reasoning without connecting it to the real-world system. In light of the transformations brought about by Large Language Models (LLMs), neuroscience, and reverse engineering, the concept of “cognitive integration” is introduced. This concept rejects the mind/model dichotomy and advocates an interconnected conception in which natural systems (the brain and cognitive faculties), artificial systems (algorithms and software), and socio-historical systems cooperate in the production of knowledge.

The article further proposes a new interpretation of the question of knowledge that transcends the dichotomy of absolute limitation, placing the human agent at the centre of an integrated system of representations, tools, and institutions. The question is thus reformulated as follows: What can a mind equipped with appropriate models, tools, and contexts know, and what remains beyond its horizon not because of an intrinsic incapacity, but because of deficiencies in the frameworks employed or in the interaction among systems? Such a position is more epistemically productive, more ontologically faithful, and more consistent with the spirit of modern science, which is founded upon integration and interconnectedness rather than fragmentation and insulation.