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
Can this chiropractor prescibe drugs? This might explain the relationship, and it would indeed be good advertising.
ReplyDelete"their relationship" Is this a Freudian slip?
ReplyDeleteWouldn't "at one point in her treatment" be more appropriate?
I would think having anything to do with Jerry Garcia's state of health was the last thing a doctor would want to publicize.
ReplyDeleteYes, but did it stop your wife from going back for more?
Ha, ha, Sydney. I have relationships with my cats, my children, my students, and my parents, which doesn't mean I have sex with all of them.
ReplyDelete