I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Hey I'm pretty funny too. Over at the Huffington Post
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/jake-reiner/the-dodgers-need-to-do-so_b_10654.html,
Jake Reiner is reporting on a a person who is about "to make her female debut as GM."
I wonder if this person has already made a male debut, or better yet a transvestite debut as GM?
Great article! Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThanks for interesting article.
ReplyDeleteExcellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!
ReplyDelete