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

"Evidence?"

I was looking up Red Rum at the time, for some reason or other, and came across two histories of Shergar, both of which claimed he had died within a week of the kidnap. This links to a BBC report in 2001 which gives the origins of that story, and confirms that the mystery has never been resolved:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/in_depth/2001/epsom_derby/1344369.stm

"I bet someone knows whether the text is still available online and, if so, where. Anyone got it?"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2003/reith2003_lecture4.shtml

But no doubt you've got there by now, toxx!

"Woo. Couldn't hack that *at all*. Most of the time there was only one box How are you supposed to select from one box?"

Ah - Alji: do you have a test for 'box blindness'??

Thanks, HS. I already posted a link, but yours goes direct to the relevant lecture. Della has me intrigued. Synaesthesia combined with lack of visualisation is a new one to me! I think I have to say that there must be a mental model if only at an unconscious level. Very little of the brain works by bandying propositions with itself. The talk of a 'language of thought' and a 'mental logic' is unsustainable.

Della, you could be a valuable experimental subject. Pity you're in NZ. I'll have to devise something to investigate your unusual features and ask you do try it. I almost mean that.

toxx

Re Quine's Thesis of Indeterminancy

Not had time to read the paper thouroughly, I will probably do so over the weekend, BUT:

If I understand it correctly (Which may be some kind of joke in this circumstance) It is essentially upholding a rule which is implicit in some of my earlier posts that there are times when it is reasonably certain (But not absolute) that what has been said has been understood correctly. At others it is equaly possible to be reasonably certain that there is some missunderstanding.

For me this implies that the conflict between theories for understanding the macro and the micro worlds does not just exist within physics and mathematics but also in linguistics and psychology, ect.

It also highlights that meaning also depends dramatically on your viewpoint.

My first encouter with synethesia was in the book The stars my destination, also titled Tiger Tiger in some countries. The anti hero gully Foyle experiences this at the end of the book. For me this issue relates to the experiences of those who have experimented with Haluciogens, perception is changed compared with normal experience, and things are never quite the same again. Other alterd states of consciousness e.g. meditation also change the experience of 'normality' if perception is so easily altered by chemicals or self discipline, how possible is it to pin 'reality' down? Isit simply a case that we have our own reality and for the most part we are attempting to discover how well this matches with other peoples, or are we attempting to convince everyone else that our reality is the right one, or are we attempting to find ways of developing communication so that by sharing our realities we come closer to an experience of the real reality.

I suspect that in communication improving our language is less important than improving our skills in developing empathy. (Which may of course include developing better language skills)

i am definitely afflicted

On the subject of tests, have you tried Tickle?

Come join my network of friends! We can connect with everyone we know, take tests, share photos and help each other! Membership is free, so just click this link and you'll be taken to my personal invitation page:

http://connect.tickle.com/invitation.html?uid=yIbx-LZKvwPCNhhw&

See you there,

Alji

"Other alterd states of consciousness e.g. meditation also change the experience of 'normality' if perception is so easily altered by chemicals or self discipline, how possible is it to pin 'reality' down?"

Callibration. It isn't perfect, but it's the closest I can get. You have to understand that I'm talking as someone who shares a non-consensual reality (NCR) with a number of friends across the pagan community. In brief, our NCR is that we believe we are able to communicate with other consciousnesses (a totally inadequate term but I can't immediately think of another). These may be gods or spirits of trees, the land, stones, streams etc. Given that we cannot test anything phenomenal, we have to rely on honest feedback from each other when comparing notes about our experiences. So this can only only be done between people:
(a) who are honest with themselves, and
(b) who, despite the differences in personality, appear to others (on the basis of other indicators within consensual reality) to be people of integrity, intelligence and 'common sense'
(c) who also measure using objective evidence where it exists, such as literary sources (for gods) or results (for divination or being given information one did not otherwise know through other means).

I am on one email group which never exceeds 20 people (and which does not include all those I trust for callibration) which comprises a group of differing disciplines including various sceinces, engineering, psychology etc and all of us hold down jobs of some responsibility, often managing technical staff. It is a group of somewhat aggressive intellectual anaysis of any proposition introduced by one of us which interests others. On one occasion we were promted, by a newcomer, into a discussion of our own separate NCRs, some of which are extreme, and of the nature of egregores - consciously created NCR consciousness. Given our approach, it was interesting both in the high degree of overlap and the areas in which we difrfered. For example, though we experienced NCR through aural, visual and internal (evocative) senses, not all of us experienced all three, nor to the same degree. I, for example, never experience anything visual. The discussion, of course, explored discernment: how we differentiate between our own desires and wises and NCR as an objective phenomenon, which comes back to callibration. The most extreme case is also the person who encounters the greatest degree of NCR: she had experiences which left physical imprints on her body, sometimes fairly radical markings or injuries, many of which she awakens to after sleep. These are attested to by her close friends and husband.

So, what is reality? We know the difference between our own NCR and what are societal norms, and we know that 'ordinary people' will find our NCR incredible, so we do not normally discuss it outside our own circles. We usually find others by discussing it among ourselves and then someone listening says "You too? So do I". We also know when people are bullsh*tting and laying claim to NCR experiences of the same kind which appear to us not to fit with our own experiences. And we cross examine them and turn them inside out to query their story. Some wimp out in the face of our scepticism, but others stick with it to the extent that may decide to expand a subset of our own parameters to include this example.

"reality is for people who can't handle drugs"_the fabulous furry freak brothers

where'd everyone go

Ooh yes, Toxxin! That would be fun...
My lack of ability to visualise means for one thing, that I have little memory for faces, and am always accidentally snubbing people, yet I am good at spelling words and recognising languages. Please tell me these are different brain areas - otherwise I may have some kind of social malfunction!
I do recognise voices very well though...
When I remember people I know, I don't remember incidents, but I do remember photos of the person, so if they look different from the photo, as can happen, I can get quite taken aback.

Alji, I just went and signed up - I'll have another look later. Thanks for the link!

good on ye

Della. These certainly are different brain areas. Women are typically, on average, more fluent in language but less capable in the area of spatial concepts such as map reading. You might just be rather an extreme case of femaleness! Do you have a problem with map reading or even gadgets that take a bit of manipulation? I'm busy right now, but I'll try to think of more by way of investigation.

toxx

Definitely I have a problem with maps and diagrams! My lack of map ability is considered a great joke by those who know me. I get lost really easily, and putting kitset furniture together is a great frustrating laugh...
I look forward to any experimental ideas you have.
No hurry!

The exact opposite of me, then. I have to "see" how things link together visually to get a grasp of them.

Noggin

I had an excellent illustration of that when I was studying education. Three of us were conducting a seminar on ADHD. I was talking about neurotransmitters, waffling about neurons, and getting a look of polite puzzlement from a woman in the front row - so I put up an overhead I had prepared (from a textbook). It had a diagram exactly illustrating what I was saying - and I saw a light go on in her head! She smiled broadly, and I realised that I should have had the overhead up all along. That certainly taught me a lesson! (and the rest of the class too, I hope, as teaching was the aim of our seminar.) Which is why I get so cross when I hear people say "Oh, there's no such thing as ADHD, s/he just needs a good kick up the *rse." (Referring to a child with the condition) But that's another story...

aye adhd must be like bread n butter to you