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...
Beekeeper 1: Well, sure is quiet in here today.
ReplyDeleteBeekeeper 2: Yes, a little too quiet, if you know what I mean.
Beekeeper 1: Hmm... I'm afraid I don't.
Beekeeper 2: You see, bees usually make a lot of noise. No noise - suggests no bees!
Beekeeper 1: Oh, I understand now.
[a bee flies by]
Beekeeper 1: Oh look, there goes one now.
Beekeeper 2: To the Beemobile!
Beekeeper 1: You mean your Chevy?
Beekeeper 2: [pause] Yes.