The research uses the images of the brain to talk
about heredity. That's a big jump. Basically the
research is saying if it shows up in the brain, then
it must be genetic/hereditary. This is the scary or
unfounded or preconceptual part of the research
depending on what angle you approach this, which
undoubtly will stir different opinions and admittedly
that's not all that bad.
Instead of the brain is genes (the strict
mechanical that gav notioned), this research might be
able to go the other way around. For instance, the
sample population is using these areas of the brain
due to their ideologies. DMB pointed out that
conservatives are not using their brain as much, thus,
their lazy, and dmb does point out that laziness can
not be linked with genes either, which is a good
point, but it is the use of the brain that I question.
Sure to not use the brain is dumb. To use it too
much I would say is a disconnect from the rest of the
world, an abstract path that relies not upon empirical
experience. Stephen Hawkins still uses data.
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
