On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow! The civility level on this list is really bottoming out . . . . along > with any sort of scientific grounding.
> Experimental (imaging) evidence shows that known words will strongly > activate some set of neurons when heard. Unknown words with recognizable > parts/features will also activate some other set of neurons when heard, > possibly allowing the individual to puzzle out the meaning even if the word > has never been heard before. Totally unknown words will not strongly > activate any neurons -- except subsequently (i.e. on a delay) some set of > HUH? neurons. Well, your imaging evidence is part imaging and part imagining since no one knows what the imaging is actually showing. I think it is commonly believed that the imaging techniques show blood flow into areas of the brain, and this is (reasonably in my view) taken as evidence of neural activity. Ok, but what kind of thinking is actually going on and how extensive are the links that don't have enough wow factor for repeatable experiments researchers to issue as a press release. So if you are going to claim that you're speculations are superiorly grounded, I would like to see some research that shows that unknown words will not strongly activate any neurons. Take your time, I am only asking a question, not challenging you to fantasy combat. Jim Bromer ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
