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 had dinner yesterday in a pub with two sinks in the gents' room.
ReplyDeleteLet me guess: the sinks let you pick up the whole tab.
The waitress asked me, 'Would you like to try our mulled wine?'
'I'll have to think that over', I responded.
Did you respond in a whiny voice, for a double whammy?
Bob,
ReplyDeleteYah beat me to the punch.