Adam's Maxim and Spinoza's Conjecture - Scientific American
A bit of neurobiological supporting evidence in:
Functional neuroimaging of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty - PubMed
And to add insult to injury, Spinoza's conjecture is nothing like Mark quoted as a fact. As expected, distorting what was said.
From, "Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty", Ann Neurol 2008;63:141–147
"Several psychological studies9–11 appear to support Spinoza’s
conjecture12 that the mere comprehension of a
statement entails the tacit acceptance of its being true,
whereas disbelief requires a subsequent process of rejection."
"Several psychological studies9–11 appear to support Spinoza’s
conjecture12 that the mere comprehension of a
statement entails the tacit acceptance of its being true,
whereas disbelief requires a subsequent process of rejection."
Bill, it applies to humans in general. According to experts such as Jonathan Haidt, we are all rather poor at seeing our own faults. All we know about ourselves is what we perceive in our own conscious awareness, which is blind to the majority of the activity going on in the brain. Incredibly easier to see the faults of others.
Last edited:
This has little to do with your claimed theory: "There is a theory in cognitive psychology that says in order to understand something, first one has to believe it.".
Actually I'm exaggerating. It has nothing to do with your theory.
The relevant part of the article is in the end:
"People with damage in this area [the ventromedial prefrontal cortex] have a difficult time feeling an emotional difference between good and bad decisions, and they are susceptible to confabulation—mixing true and false memories and conflating reality with fantasy."
This applies to anybody hearing picosecond jitter or having the need to spend fortunes on dac clocks
"People with damage in this area [the ventromedial prefrontal cortex] have a difficult time feeling an emotional difference between good and bad decisions, and they are susceptible to confabulation—mixing true and false memories and conflating reality with fantasy."
This applies to anybody hearing picosecond jitter or having the need to spend fortunes on dac clocks
did it appear to you that this had been, before Your penetration here, a thread about real products, in real evolution, with real data. To real people really interested in this.
Not this muddy swamp of hienas and trolls entertaining each other, while a slow filthy smell of decay emanates, after the original author had been killed off.
Not this muddy swamp of hienas and trolls entertaining each other, while a slow filthy smell of decay emanates, after the original author had been killed off.
Well, that's your opinion and not surprising, given your afflation.
Claims were made, questions were asked, dancing ensued without answers. Period. The only muddying that occurred were attempts to not answer reasonable questions.
I would say that everything has been talked about. Others did technical research for your group and you didn't like what the results were. Okay, fine. But if you are going to claim anything about confusion, take onus for your own actions.
If you couldn't get your point across after 5040 posts now, just how long do you think it would take?
This is now a dead horse.
Claims were made, questions were asked, dancing ensued without answers. Period. The only muddying that occurred were attempts to not answer reasonable questions.
I would say that everything has been talked about. Others did technical research for your group and you didn't like what the results were. Okay, fine. But if you are going to claim anything about confusion, take onus for your own actions.
If you couldn't get your point across after 5040 posts now, just how long do you think it would take?
This is now a dead horse.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.