RE: why do we enjoy poetry From the perspective of neuroscience?
January 20, 2019 at 11:58 pm
(This post was last modified: January 21, 2019 at 12:08 am by The Grand Nudger.)
I was speaking to something else, consider a statement earlier in thread, that subjective and objective were wholly disparate and, therefore (at least in Bennys mind) unresolvable to each other. Linguistically, literally, that's true, they are irreconcilably disparate - but that hasn't stopped science from investigating things with both components..because, while the meanings of the words may be night and day, the fundamental process by which both are achieved has, thusfar..been the same across both cases.
Questions such as "how can subjective reports supply objective conclusions" display a lack of creativity and an adherence to linguistic stricture, not reality, or the reality of scientific inquiry. Subjective reports are just fine, obviously. If I made a feel good drug, the best way to know how well it worked would be to give a bunch of people the pills and ask them how they felt. I don't even have to understand the underlying (objective) chemistry in order to understand the effect of the (subjective) response or experience.
The same is true of thought, at present. We don;t actually understand the process...but we can see that there is one, literally see it happening before our eyes, at least as well as a voltimeter can see electricity. OFC we could always posit that theres "something else"..what I like to call the special sauce..but we don't actually have any reason to do so at present. Lending credence to the notion that these objections are more special pleading than a special case..and in that, suggesting that Bennys objections are literary or linguistic (broadly, semantic) rather than philosophic, objective, or scientific. He's a smart guy, he knows what words mean...but words get funky in a scientific setting. We say, for example, that things which aren't even moving have a "spin", lol.
So along comes Benny. "Spin you say, my good man, why, that thing isn't spinning at all. Since spinning and non spinning are different, how could spinning science ever answer non spinning questions? Balderdash!"
Questions such as "how can subjective reports supply objective conclusions" display a lack of creativity and an adherence to linguistic stricture, not reality, or the reality of scientific inquiry. Subjective reports are just fine, obviously. If I made a feel good drug, the best way to know how well it worked would be to give a bunch of people the pills and ask them how they felt. I don't even have to understand the underlying (objective) chemistry in order to understand the effect of the (subjective) response or experience.
The same is true of thought, at present. We don;t actually understand the process...but we can see that there is one, literally see it happening before our eyes, at least as well as a voltimeter can see electricity. OFC we could always posit that theres "something else"..what I like to call the special sauce..but we don't actually have any reason to do so at present. Lending credence to the notion that these objections are more special pleading than a special case..and in that, suggesting that Bennys objections are literary or linguistic (broadly, semantic) rather than philosophic, objective, or scientific. He's a smart guy, he knows what words mean...but words get funky in a scientific setting. We say, for example, that things which aren't even moving have a "spin", lol.
So along comes Benny. "Spin you say, my good man, why, that thing isn't spinning at all. Since spinning and non spinning are different, how could spinning science ever answer non spinning questions? Balderdash!"
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
