h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Noggin. I'm sure you know that 'waffling' wasn't addressed to you! OK, the congruence of a tilt and a spillage might seem rational to you. However, to me it is just physicality and we could not know about it in the absence of observation. For me, that makes it contingent and therefore not rational.

toxx

Not that one, no But one or two of my posts have been, as I recognise myself.

I wasn't thinking of that sort of congruence... though considering Hume we have no reason to think that the tilt *causes* the spillage... but we'd think someone irrational (outside of a philosophy class, of course ) if they thought otherwise.

Noggin

Noggin. We hone ourselves on each others' comments. I think that Hume would settle for cause as a constant connexion. I claim no more than that for it, which makes it empirical. He would deny any 'necessary connexion'.

Too pissed to recall the original issue now, but I think the above is relevant.

toxx

"What historical figure has done more damage than Jesus of Nazarath ... ? Mohammed?"

The discoverer of penicillin.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

Are you really saying that someone who studies the forms and functions of nature giving rise to an accidental discovery that has helped to heal millions is really the person who has done most damage?



Isnt that a bit like laying the blame for everything that people choose to print at Caxton's door?

Re Damage,

I find it very hard to lay blame at the doors of individuals.

Using the example of Fleming (The discoverer of Penicillin)

He discovered that the secretions of the Penicillin growth on his petri dish had killed the nearby bacteria. In conversations with other scientists the possible applications of this as a 'medicine' to kill bacterial infections came up, many individuals contributed to the reasearch needed to develop this into a usable form.

Conversations then took place concerning how this might be produced on a large enough scale for it to become available to a large population. A manufacturer was identified and preduction begun.

Alongside this you have the media response to this 'Mirical Drug', and the resulting public clamour.

arrising out of this you have both the over demand of patients and the over prescription of Medical Doctors.

This highlights the Systemic nature of human existance it is next to imposible to completely absolve ourselves and those close members of our families and freinds we view as 'good people' from complicity in many of the worlds ill's. To be fair some are more culpable than others. But I remember asking my dr for an antibiotic for a chest complaint and being quite insistant despite his reluctance.

Re 'The Givens of Human nature'

A very dense discussion that one.

1) Hind brain: As I understand it there are some instinctive elements to the functioning of the hind brain, but that the bulk of its purpose is wiring rather than processing, (If we take the computer analogy)

A good example of this is the Amigdala: in the context of an emotional response the amigdala can very effectively bypass cognitive functioning, triggereing what can appear to be instinctive responses. However the response produced can be managed through developing an awareness of the physical impact on the body.

e.g. in anger management training individuals are supported to recognise the increase in breathing, faster heart rate, increase in temperature and impulsive thinking (This is not all but it will do for now). By becoming aware of these the main wiring system is re engaged and individuals are enabled to continue thinking despite their emotional response and discover a more reasonable strategy.

The apparent instinctive response has been bypassed.

But was the response instinctive in the first place. Anger is related to the Fight/Flight impulse and it seems to me is closely related to fear. The instinctive response then does exist, but how is it defined?

Traditionally Circus performers would carry their children accross the high wire in preperation for learning later to become a performer. (Today this would raise child protection issues) however, because of the presence of a sensitive and loving caregiver the child was very often content for this to happen. Having never learned that the situation was terrefying the child would later be open to learning that the situation was dangerous but able to be managed. The Fight Flight response was never directly engaged and the Amigdala never given the opportunity to bypass cognitive functioning.

Therefore the Instinct is Fight/Flight, the identity of the danger can be learned, unlearned, defined and redefined, as can the response to this danger.

2) Rationality, logic, illogic and irationality.

This is also a very dense and complex discussion, at one time I tended to agree with Witgenstein that it was imposible for humans to think illogically, he seemed to belive that the contradictions in human behaviour arose out of faulty premises on which an individuals reasoning was based. Adler seemed to go along with this and argued that many people struggling in their lives could be helped if the therapist could think their way into the 'private' logic of the individual.

Of late I have had less sympathy with this, I believe humans can be illogical even within their private logic as this can help them avoid deny or suppress feelings they would rather not have, eg anger for some or fear for others, Jelousy ect ect.

I also belive that very traumatised individuals can become completely divorced from logic, i.e. their experiences so overwhelm them that they literaly fall apart in their mind, (This may be one cause of Schizophrenia)this arrises as an interaction between being born with a sensitive disposition and an overwhelming environment.

Another factor which has recently entered my thinking concerns the development of narratives, (Story telling in its widest possible sense) As I have read Foucault (Despite what seems to me an overuse of descriptors, common among french authors in my opinion) I have become quite attracted to his ideas about the impossiblity of constructing completely coherent narratives and discourses. His emphasis on understanding the discontinuities has led to some clarity (Paradoxically) in my mind about some elements of human behaviour I used to find obscure.

E.G. The narratives and discourse on this thread have shifted very considerably over the short time I have been contibuting to it, re-reading some of it, it is not allways possible to identify the logical link which gave rise to the deviation from the initial topic.

I belive this arrises out of the fundamental impossibility of knowing what meaning is intended by a given statement. We can surmise and deduce and often be almost completely right, but not certain. As a result of this minor misunderstandings give rise to discontinuities which can: push a narrative in one direction or another, or kill one discourse, or give birth to a new one. In this context the 'givens' become imposible to certify and we are reduced once again to trusting ourselves and others on the basis of nothing more than guess work.


Whew I mostly avoided Waffling (I think) Vroomfondle and Majicthise send their best wishes.

Blicky 100% re caxton distributors there!


Was not him it was them mi lord Surely the blame lays with his
followers, if that argument the blame lays with Eve, apples and all that

the tilt *causes* the spillage
Spillage another name for overflow, metyphorical speaking spillage
generly being term for waste , whilst overflow not so,

Re penicillin i have always for some reason tried not to use and agree

::Systemic nature of human existance it is next to imposible to completely absolve ourselves and those close members of our families and freinds ::
This miricle drug being only effective if whole course of tablets taken
Otherwise all that happens the "infection" this drug has almost
"cured/killed" in your body will meet [families and freinds ] with its
own "penicillan immunization" from you not takeing the full course
so endith the first waffle

Another issue that raises its head here is the tightness or looseness of the linkage between what is innate and what ensues with learning.

As an example from the cognitive sphere it has been surmised from studies of infant behaviour that the brain has a built in module for keeping track of changes in small numbers. Rare individuals in whom this module is absent/faulty never get to grips with numbers, much less higher mathematics. But these things go far beyond what is given innately, which has the form of "a starter pack", if you like.

Noggin

Hi Blicky and Stronty

Fleming! That was his name! I had a senior moment when typing up my suggestion is all .

The introduction of a reliable method of fighting bacterial infection was a real landmark in the overpopulation of this planet by humanity. It took away one of the last natural control mechanisms.

Of course the amount of antibiotics consumed by people is a drop in the ocean compared to the amounts given to farmed animals. This in turn allows many more animals to kept huddled together in a state of low-grade sickness and has changed the whole nature of livestock farming. The entire foodchain is awash in antibiotics.

The sting in the tail is that we may be steadily creating bugs that will wipe the majority of us out in some mad pandemic. Swings and roundabouts!

I personally ask for symptomatic relief for minor infections, rather than antibiotics, and ride it out, strengthening my immune system as I do. If I have a cut and it goes yukky I get some iodine! Indeed I think it must be several years since I took any. I do the same for my children, though I am careful to take medical advice in their case.

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\.

Discontinuity in discourse Part 2

Topic (From my point of view) inateness, instinct ect

Discontinuity evolving into discourse on antibiotics and overpoulation

Noggin the Nog,

Starter Packs, Even the numbers idea you describe is under question as I understand it, as it relies on the assumption that children do not learn this in the first few weeks, days, hours or even minutes of their lives.

The most startling idea I have come accross is that in the first five or six years of a childs life the neurons in their brains make a staggering number of connections with each other, these are then trimmed by almost 80 percent. It seems as if the brain is attempting to accommodate as many possibilities as possible but then selects from the most common what to retain. (This relates to critical periods)

This seems to be the starter pack to me: the potential to develop in response to an almost infinate number of possibilities and then refine that development in ways in line with the most consistant experiences.

Before it beginns to sound like I am backing myself into a corner I think I should acknowledge that there are dispositions and tendencies, I have not as yet read anything or seen anything which has led me to belive that too many of these dispositions are universal.

Interestingly one disposition which may be as close to univerasal as one can come seems to be concerning maths/science. Governments around the world particularly in the US and the UK have had a fairly strong policy agenda to socialy engineer a greater interest in Maths and science degrees among students applying to universities.

Despite all the psychology, advertising and other pressure they have brought to bear the percentage of students moving in this direction has stubbornly remained at about 40%. I wouldn't regard myself as a dunce at science and Maths though don't make claims of extreme cleverness, I actually found maths easier to think about at school than history.

But have still ended up taking an arts degree, and working in a field driven more by intuition than analytical science.

The hint is that even if we are good at maths that there actually more interesting things to do implying that as a species we might be biased against it.

The case for the number module is very similar to the case for innateness of certain aspects of language.

That it's not present at birth is not a case against its innateness; genetic influence on development doesn't stop at birth, and critical learning periods are now regarded as a sign of innate elements that require exposure to the environment to develop as they should. There has to be something to tell us how to *begin* processing environmental cues though; you can't learn how to learn from scratch.

Noggin

Well done Pinniped,

It may be that no one will ever read this, that's ok, but I just had to admire your diatribe. Religion is a hot topic, and it's probably going to get hotter as the years pass mainly because the West Set of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism is poised to end our world as we know it. For the Christians this will be a happy self-fulfilling prophecy of the highest absurdity. Through ignorance, lack of scholarship and intolerance more fuel is constantly added to the fire. The attitude that "my God is bigger than your god", and "we are right, everyone else is wrong" is prevalent today as it ever was.

President Bush of the U.S. is one of the worst offenders. His agenda sailed through congress and as he greedily rips the heart out of Iraq, his people applaud. The fuel he so deperately seeks for the SUV's of his country, is helping to change the very climate of the entire planet! Now Saddam Hussein wasn't a good character, but he did serve a purpose by corking up the Shiite and Sunni hatred for each other, well now that's unleashed again, this is just beautiful!

I'm getting depressed, so I'll stop now.

This is a difficult area and I am by no means ceratin that the tentative opinion I hold at present is the right one.

a) Children deprived of stimulation fail to thrive, their behaviour can in extreme cases remain exactly like a babys, even down to bladder control.

b) The instinct of a child is distinctly to attach to its mother or permanent mother substitute.

c) Appropriate development is by definition of the word 'appropriate' socialy determined, inapproprate development is therefore qualitatively different but not quantitatively

d) Comlexity theory indicates that some systems are so complex that it is practically impossible to determine what the inital conditions are or might be, and that such systems are also imensely sensitive to those initial conditions, all that can be determined by observation is the patterns that develop, and these patterns may well be changed by the act of observing them. (The observer becomes a part of the system, e.g Schrodingers Cat) Humans and their relationships are such complex systems.

In light of the above points the relationship between a child and its mother or permanent mother substitute becomes pivotal, I don't believe it is possible to differentiate between what is inate and what is learned in this relationship. Twin studies have made noble attempts to do so. But critiques of these studies have suggested (to me at least) that what you find depends on what you were looking for in the first place.

The instinct seems to me to make a relationship with the caregiver (A component of this may include learning), there may be variations between individuals concerning which dispositions they bring into that relationship, the nature of the relationship may then suppress or amplify certain dispositions. However I believe it is impossible to describe as instinctive anything more than the drive to attach as so much else appears to develop according to the nature of this attachment. The processing of enviromental cues seems to me to principally be developed in this relationship.

The presence in humans of a big brain provides a capacity to learn and a potential to reason, but this does not lead to the assumption that humans have an instinct to learn. (Although they may well have one) I do not find the appropriate environmental stimulus = appropriate development argument as convincing as I once did. Moraly and accademically it makes sense to me but logically the reasoning doesnt hold together in the face of critical review as well as I would like it to. My intuition tells me it's right but I struggle to construct a logical proof.

A logical proof I can construct though is that the 'critical periods' are certainly the most sensitive, and the development that takes place within them is very difficult to shift at a later date. This doesnt address the problematic aspect of empirically defining what is appropriate as a theme seperated from intrinsic value and moral judgements, which rest on a philosophical rather than an impirical basis.

Forgive my ignorace again,

Why do some contibutors post a message containing the smiley



and nothing else (other smileys sometimes)

Are they going to read one?

Do they think I am reading one?

Do they think I'm writing one?

Do they think I should write one rather than post long boring posts?

Do they think it would be more interesting to read one than read the current conversation?

Do they think I should read one before I make ill informed comments

Am I really Truman and everyone's watching me writing this,

Help My neurosis is kicking into overload.

Try Again

Why do some contibutors post a message containing the smiley



and nothing else (other smileys sometimes)

Are they going to read one?

Do they think I am reading one?

Do they think I'm writing one?

Do they think I should write one rather than post long boring posts?

Do they think it would be more interesting to read one than read the current conversation?

Do they think I should read one before I make ill informed comments

Am I really Truman and everyone's watching me writing this,

Help My neurosis is kicking into overload.

Is quite often used as a bookmark; i.e. to make it easy to find your place in the backlog or a particularly interesting point in a conversation.

Some people use instead, as in 'just strolling through'.

F

SD no worries, just book marking where I have currently read up to I don't have anything to add to the conversation, but I'm still listening...well reading..you know what I mean.

F - I still can't work either out