""What we need now is 20 years of serious neuroscience, not more speculation about the handful of studies that have been done so far," he says."
Too bad that we have no freedom to decide whether to pursue serious neuroscience instead of more speculation...it's all up to "neurons, and there are ions that flow through membranes". As impotent spectators to the magic of calcium and potassium, we can only sit back and enjoy the view from beneath their puppet strings. Unfortunately they have learned nothing from Libet's mistakes. I can't understand how intelligent scientists could continue to conflate free will with the awareness of free will and the reporting of the awareness of free will - clearly three different sub-personal capabilities when fragmented in a contrived laboratory experiment. How could anyone who is serious about consciousness think that repeating a conditioned, meaningless reaction to some stimulus would yield good insight into the motivations and capacities of the human psyche? Craig On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:05:29 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 4/10/2013 1:57 PM, Yon wrote: > > New replications of Libet's experiment... > > > > > http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23367-brain-imaging-spots-our-abstract-choices-before-we-do.html > > > > Yon > > > It's disappointing to me that they don't take advantage of these > volunteers to repeat the Grey Walter experiment. ISTM that it offers a lot > more precision and avoids questions of timing in reporting. > > Anyway it's another indication that consciousness may be overrated. > > Brent > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
