Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
First: It's an unwarranted and unevidenced personal attack to say I regard people with Asper's as inferior. I don't. They are what they are, just as hyperemotional people are what they are. The intent of the label was the opposite, to point out that emotional over-coloring of decisions can lead to socially tragic outcomes as well as under-colored ones.

It's been pointed out for a long time (Descartes' Error, The Adapted Mind) that human decisions are made more by the diaphragm than the forebrain. Just listening to the love stories about instinct, poetry, guessing, etc makes me wonder if maybe we're way too far over in that direction.

We already have clear, logical, rational fact piles to assemble our decisions from, but we don't. Maybe we need a fact piled with personality, sort of like Al Gore, only warmer. Easy enough to build a C3PO diplomatic robot, easy enough to build a Jeopardy winner.

Maybe we have already gone far enough, and need a middle ground, devoid of hysteria about human value, since they already range from submission to chauvinism.

Thanks for your comments. They're all valuable.

Align culture with our nature. Ot else!

by ormondotvos (ormond.otvosnospamgmialcon) on Fri Aug 26th, 2011 at 08:57:01 PM EST
It's been pointed out for a long time (Descartes' Error, The Adapted Mind) that human decisions are made more by the diaphragm than the forebrain.

Not quite.  

What's been found over the last 20 years is the limbic lobe, emotion/mood inducing neuro-transmitters, the neuro-hormonal system, the medulla obligata, and even the cerebellum have as much to do with cognitive functioning as the frontal lobe¹.  In the light of current knowledge the "purely" cognitive functioning brain nuclei seems restricted to Broadmann's Area 10 -- the least understood part of the brain.  

¹  With some neurologists arguing the anterior portion of the frontal lobes should really be assigned to the limbic system.


She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Aug 26th, 2011 at 11:08:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
...the "purely" cognitive functioning brain nuclei seems restricted to Broadmann's Area 10 -- the least understood part of the brain.

Probably why it's considered the seat of human: we know bugger-all about what it does.

LOL

In my opinion, we're going to find out cognition, like everything else, has more than one nuclei involved with our "higher cognitive functions" being a Emergent Phenomenon from, in this case, our existence as a mutually interacting and supporting social species.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Fri Aug 26th, 2011 at 11:20:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If what you say is true, then guessing is the best we can do?

I don't think so. Emergence theory doesn't appear to me as a crutch for giving up on governance.

Align culture with our nature. Ot else!

by ormondotvos (ormond.otvosnospamgmialcon) on Sat Aug 27th, 2011 at 02:05:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Emergence isn't the same thing as Guessing.  Work on bifurcative mathematics has given us some intellectual tools to be able to predict Emergence will happen under certain conditions and, to some extent, be able to predict the overall Fitness Landscape defined as the possible range of actions¹.  Knowing Emergence is a Law of Nature allows one to count on it, allowing it to be used in various ways both on the predictive and operational levels.  

Oddly enough.

¹ just to keep it simple

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Sun Aug 28th, 2011 at 03:02:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series