Cognitive inhibition is the ability to control inner and outer distracting stimuli, thereby making sure that working memory is not cluttered with irrelevant information or content. Cognitive inhibition is believed to strongly influence, helping to control both sexual and aggressive urges within human society. Do you really want us to take these gloves off?
Scepticism is generally any questioning attitude towards assumed knowledge, facts, or opinions and beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere. Scepticism allows one to dig deeper into a subject or situation, to reverify facts or to discover conclusions that may be in error. Most scientists, being sceptics, test the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to a systematic investigation using some form of the scientific method. As a result, a number of claims are considered 'pseudoscience' if they are found to improperly apply or ignore the fundamental aspects of the scientific method. Scientific scepticism may discard beliefs pertaining to things outside perceivable observation and thus outside the realm of systematic, empirical falsifiability and testability. In other words, to be a scientist, whatever you are investigating, the normal course is to at first assume that, whatever your hypothesis is, that it is wrong, that the null hypothesis - that the effect one is investigating does not really exist is true. If you are entranced that the non-null hypothesis is true, you have a cognitive bias that may adversely affect your investigation, cause you to overlook critical tests that could disprove your thesis. You are basically too gullible and trusting to evaluate scientific work. A good scientific theory goes through a crucible of scepticism before it is considered respectable. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote: Dear Dear Anartaxius, Somehow we must deal with this “Cognitive Inhibition” problem which so evidently is at the root of so much skepticism around some certain things so good that it obstructs a positive consensus about our history and where we could together go. I do not wish to force my thoughts upon you or anyone else, but I feel forced myself. Little as I know of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, I would fain do my part to correct the tone and the statements of the newspapers and newsgroups, and of our FFL people here generally, respecting his character and actions. It costs us nothing to be just. We can at least express our sympathy with, and admiration of, him and his companions, and that is what I now propose to do. Sincerely, -Buck in the Dome
