[Ham]
Since it's hard for you to ignore me, I assume it's because what I say is 
difficult to ignore.  Appreciate the compliment, Krimel..

[Krimel]
They are too few, too far between and too often backhanded. But let me add
that I find you entertaining as well.

[Ham]
Yes, the 'peek-a-boo' video is entertaining and could be offered as evidence

that what the six-month-old child experiences is impermanent, as it "comes 
and goes" at the will of another.  What it does show is that the 
entertainment value of the toy is clearly greater than the towel that hides 
it, and value endures over the four-month interval to the second half of 
the video.  This is a cleverly-designed experiment which demonstrates your 
astute comprehension of the subject.

[snip]

[Krimel]
Thanks for sharing your first impressions about this work. But let me assure
you that the questions you asked and hundreds you have yet to think of
asking have been addressed hundreds of times over the past 60 years in
countries all over the world. Back in the late '30s Jean Piaget began ask
questions about why and in what ways children think differently than adults.
Three generations of researchers have a worked to show that much of what
Piaget thought was wrong. But his approach to the problem, the questions he
asked and the research he conducted still have an enormous impact on even
the man on the street's understanding of childhood and children.

By the way Piaget never really thought of himself as a psychologist. He was
a philosopher who sought to test his philosophy in the real world. You
really should acquaint yourself with his work before second guessing him.

[Ham]
Is "transducing energy into neural impulses" your idea of speaking in common

terms?

[Krimel]
I was going for a simplicity and brevity. But there is no special meaning
attached to any of the terms. To energy is transduced when it changes form.
When gasoline burns chemical energy is transduced into heat. When a rock
rolls down a hill potential energy is tranduced into kinetic energy. When a
photon hits the leaf of a plant light energy is tranduced into chemical
energy.

A neural impulse is a set of electro-chemical reactions that travel down
nerve fibers. Electrical interactions travel within each cell but chemical
reactions occur in the synaptic gaps between cell as the impulses are
transferred from cell to cell.

We have sensory nerves that transduce light into neural impulses in the
eyes. Sensory cells that transduce chemical energy into our noses and
mouths. Kinetic energy is tranduced energy in our ears and in several
different ways on our skin. As Jill Bolte-Taylor said in her TED
presentation we are energy beings exchanging energy in our environment.

But I mistakenly thought "transducing energy into neural impulses" was more
concise.

[Ham]
And is the suggestion that "Values are mostly inherited" another assertion 
that you can't justify?  Values are neither genetic nor biological; they are

the essence os our proprietary sensibility.  AsMarsha says,

[Krimel]
Who said I can't justify this assertion? Values are what we like and
dislike. They are positive or negative, good or bad. All of our emotional
responses are hardwired. They are expressed autonomically and well as
through movement of various muscles. They are nearly impossible to hide or
to fake. They are expressed identically by most people everywhere on earth
and can be identified in others everywhere on earth. Infants enter the world
with an impressive range of values and they are equipped to communicate
themselves valuistically to any adult in earshot.

In addition to that, the closer we are to other primates on the phylogenic
tree the more similar are our emotional expressions. We do _learn_ which
stimuli in the environment are most likely to evoke what kind of valuistic
response. But we are genetically programmed to value food, warmth and
companionship; we learn what is good to eat, where it is safe to sleep and
who it is safe to sleep with. We are not free to enjoy being ignored or to
be hungry or to like being smacked on the butt or to enjoy eating our
offspring.

[Ham]
> Things like time, space, motion, desire, cause&effect, &etc.,
> also do not inherently exist and are nothing but conceptions.

Except that "conceptions" are intellectual constructs (existents or 
patterns?) of Value, which is the individual's sense of Essence, the 
uncreated non-existent source of existence.

[Krimel]
I did not say that and don't especially agree with it but I vigorously
disagree that we have a "sense of Essence, the uncreated non-existent source
of existence". I have no idea what that is supposed to mean but please don't
explain it to me. Instead take a stab at addressing the question you keep
avoiding which is, once again: What reason can you give for suspecting the
existence of an uncreated Absolute unchanging source or whatever it is you
are evasively are calling God today?

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/

Reply via email to