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...
A very sober and well thought out analysis of your vote.
ReplyDeleteOne would not expect it from the man who "Rock the non vote" many years ago.
I do not like Clinton much either and I do not follow the election very closely so I may have missed it, but is there really evidence that she is guilty of 'inciting her supporters to bully anyone supporting Trump, sometimes violently assaulting Trump voters, sometimes destroying their property, and sometimes trying to deny them their livelihoods.'?
ReplyDeleteYes. Trump is being depicted as the next Hitler. Therefore his supporters are Nazis. And certainly it would be fine to beat up Nazis to stop them from taking over!
DeleteTry this:
Deletehttp://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/no-human-is-irredeemable/
That article points to this one:
Deletehttp://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/09/hillary-clintons-47-percent-moment-calls-trump-supporters-racist-sexist-homophobic-xenophobic-islamaphobic/
Clinton does call half of Trump supporters 'racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic'.
I would agree this could be interpreted as potentially inflammatory - but it would be stretch to say this constitutes 'inciting her supporters to bully anyone supporting Trump, sometimes violently assaulting Trump voters, sometimes destroying their property, and sometimes trying to deny them their livelihoods.'
"And certainly it would be fine to beat up Nazis to stop them from taking over!"
DeleteHas Clinton said this? Would this be fine? I do not believe it would be fine.