Tom, I understand, I had to read yours a few times myself before I tumbled to the ambiguity in my too succinct phrase.
I was much influenced in my undergrad years by the writings of Trigant Burrow on the idea of an “oceanic feeling” but couldn't find much on the web right off. Regards, Jon http://inquiryintoinquiry.com > On Jul 18, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Ozzie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jon ~ > I had to read twice to identify the change you made to your earlier comment > ("The idea does not bear examination"). Thank you for adding the patina of a > future unspecified test that my as-yet undeveloped theory could not "survive" > if I were foolish enough to continue working on it. That is more > academic-sounding. > > Regards, > Tom Wyrick > > > >> On Jul 18, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Tom, >> By "bear" I meant "bear up under", which is to say "survive", it being a >> thesis already examined at length. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon >> >> >> >> >> http://inquiryintoinquiry.com >> >>> On Jul 18, 2015, at 1:09 PM, Ozzie <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Jon, List ~ >>> My previous post on this subject was comprised of survey data and a few >>> summary comments that could be verified by clicking a link. >>> >>> The response: "The idea does not bear examination." >>> >>> It is common that smart, busy people do not have time to ponder "trivial" >>> issues that other (less exceptional) people DO have time to examine. I'm >>> in that latter group. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Tom Wyrick >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jul 18, 2015, at 7:20 AM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Tom, List, >>>> >>>> A person is free to go on believing that we begin our lives in a state of >>>> oceanic confluence >>>> with our existential, biological, and social matrices but the idea does >>>> not bear examination. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Jon, List - >>> >>>> "I'll just leave my sample statistical for what it tells of themes >>>> universal." >>> >>> Since you're on vacation, I looked up some figures on low-weight births. >>> Among non-Hispanic White women in the USA, the low-weight birth rate is >>> about 7.2%, or 1-in-14 births. The rate is lower than the overall average >>> among women age 25-35, and is highest among women over 40 years and for >>> women giving birth to multiple children -- a number on the upswing. The >>> latter two causes appear to be physiological/medical, and unrelated to >>> neglect of the child's welfare. So the rate of pre-birth "neglect" among >>> this main cohort of child-bearers must be below 1-in-20. The trend is >>> gradually trending higher over time. Very-low weight births among >>> non-Hispanic White women is 1.2%. >>> http://mchb.hrsa.gov/chusa08/hstat/hsi/pages/203vlbw.html >>> >>> Data on breast feeding show that about 75% of all mothers breast feed their >>> children some of the time, and 12.5% (1/8) breast feed exclusively during >>> the first 6 months. Breast feeding is positively related to household >>> income, ranging from about 10.6% at the bottom end of the income scale to >>> 14.7% at the top. (This effect may reflect differences in leisure time, >>> education and other things.) >>> >>> I'm not suggesting these data answer any deeper questions. I only looked >>> them up to see how prevalent the problem of "neglect" might be during the >>> pre-birth (gestation) period. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Tom Wyrick >>> >>> >>>> On Jul 17, 2015, at 3:40 PM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Tom, List, >>>> >>>> Vacating as I am (on our annual dramatic immersion) and having no new >>>> thoughts for the nonce on the hoary old mater of nature v. nurser I would >>>> be reduced to recycling links to previous adumbrations — were it not that >>>> I've been chastened from that — so I'll just leave my sample statistical >>>> for what it tells of themes universal. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> http://inquiryintoinquiry.com >>>> >>>>> On Jul 17, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Ozzie <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Jon - >>>>> I believe mothers who deny basic care to their fetuses and babies are a >>>>> minority, and that when the neglected/abandoned children get older they >>>>> are often emotionally disturbed and have an impaired ability to think >>>>> objectively. >>>>> >>>>> That does not seem to be the right starting point for a discussion of >>>>> instinct & emotion in the logical process. If we want to discuss human >>>>> instinct, we should focus on a representative human instead of an >>>>> abnormal one. (The logic of emotionally damaged people is more psychology >>>>> than philosophy.) >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Tom Wyrick >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 17, 2015, at 2:08 PM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom, List, >>>>>> >>>>>> Having done statistical consulting for nurse researchers I can tell you >>>>>> that "low birth-weight babies" and "mother-infant communication" are two >>>>>> major areas of research and practice. In neither case is perinatal life >>>>>> quite so halcyon as we'd like to imagine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Jon >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/17/2015 11:53 AM, Ozzie wrote: >>>>>>> Ben, list - >>>>>>> Thanks for your interesting comments. I will spend more time thinking >>>>>>> about them later today. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me briefly address one sentence from your comments: "I'd say that >>>>>>> instincts can also be triggered _inside_ the body, e.g., by prolonged >>>>>>> emptiness of the stomach." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> According to the common definition (interpretant) instincts are >>>>>>> triggered by things in the external world. Before birth, food is >>>>>>> ALWAYS available to the baby. After birth, and assuming an attentive >>>>>>> mother (caregiver), food continues to be available without any effort >>>>>>> or reciprocation on the baby's behalf. This goes on daily for many >>>>>>> years, so not feeling hunger pains becomes the norm, the expectation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Against that backdrop, when food is withheld (by the external >>>>>>> environment), one's sensation of hunger (-) is a disturbance to the >>>>>>> status quo (0), which summons the instinct to do something (+) to make >>>>>>> that "pain" go away. When something from the environment is eaten (+), >>>>>>> the sensation (-) disappears (0). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is in this sense hunger pains and their elimination are related to >>>>>>> (triggered by) the individual's contact with the external world. If >>>>>>> the individual eats a full meal AND THEN feels hungry, I agree that >>>>>>> particular sensation has an *internal trigger (likely emotions or a >>>>>>> physical disability). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Tom Wyrick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2015, at 8:04 AM, Benjamin Udell <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regarding some of your comments, I'd say that instincts can also be >>>>>>>> triggered _inside_ the body, e.g., by prolonged emptiness of the >>>>>>>> stomach. >>> >>>>>>>
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
