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
I wish I could tell you that, but I can't.
ReplyDeleteAt a get together the other night, there were several women discussing this, and two of them had it, and 3 of them had experienced it during pregnancy.
ReplyDeleteWas the third party unable to attain a climax outside of pregnancy?
ReplyDeleteDoes the drug treatment put your leg to sleep?
ReplyDeleteRLS sounds funny until you yourself suffer from it!
ReplyDeleteI had it and it was no fun.
The drug I took for it did the trick.
The drugs I take always to do the trick _ intended or not.
ReplyDeleteGreat article! Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThanks for interesting article.
ReplyDeleteNice Blog!
ReplyDeleteThank You! Very interesting article. Do you can write anything else about it?
ReplyDeleteVery interesting site. Blog is very good. I am happy that I think the same!
ReplyDeleteNice! Nice site! Good resources here. I will bookmark!
ReplyDeleteExcellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!
ReplyDeleteI see first time your site guys. I like you :)
ReplyDelete