Re: Neural netss (was Re: death of the mind.)

From: David Longley (David_at_longley.demon.co.uk)
Date: 09/26/04 

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 18:34:45 +0100

In article <4156e19c.25346264@netnews.att.net>, Lester Zick
<lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> writes
>On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 14:47:56 +0100, David Longley
><David@longley.demon.co.uk> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>
>>In article <41546748.1463442@netnews.att.net>, Lester Zick
>><lesterDELzick@worldnet.att.net> writes
>
>[. . .]
>
>>>Did you mean to answer my question, David, or merely babble on
>>>evasively the way evolution has conditioned you to behave?
>>>
>>
>>We're all a product of our genetic and environmental histories Lester.
>
>Sure, David. That's hardly the issue. Some of us are also products of
>under achievement, neurotic envy, and deliberate malice. It's called
>whining.

There are all sorts of consequences and there are all sorts of folk
psychological names for them. This *is* very much the issue, but as
always, your metaphysical obsessions render you oblivious to this.
>
>>What some of us try to do is share the more productive consequences of
>>those histories with others. Some of us *do* appreciate that we are
>>animals, and as creatures of our environments (cultures) we also
>>appreciate that there are benefits to be shared from how we have been
>>trained.
>>
>>At times, you've shown brief moments of lucidity. You should work on
>>those, trying to let others help you to increase their frequency at the
>>expense of the metaphysics and other forms of abuse which usually
>>characterise so many of your posts (and I suspect your behaviour
>>elsewhere).
>
>David, all you want is to horn in on subjects in which you have no
>expertise or competence.

Like other researchers I am certainly aware that there are matters which
require considerable further research. To that extent, there is an
element of truth to that, except that you, as usual, put a perversely
neurotic gloss on it.

> I fully expect any day now for Glen to
>announce that differences and differences between differences etc.
>are the missing link in materialism and behaviorist psychological
>explanations.
>
>Regards - Lester

Maybe you should act on that as one of those moments of lucidity.
You've been told repeatedly to look into what is referred to by "the
stimulus control of behaviour". To that end you were advised to find out
about the Lashley-Wade hypothesis as a start. You currently ignore what
you're told, and that's how deluded people behave. They really don't
want to know or have their neurotic behaviour exposed as that would mean
having to learn something new, which is risky. Such folk come up with
all sorts of subterfuges in order to sustain their delusional behaviour.
They don't, won't or can't readily learn from the experience of others.
This is why I compared you to Ken Collins. It's also why I suggested,
rather vainly I suppose, that you studied "Two Dogmas of Empiricism",
especially the last third (the Quine-Duhem thesis) and how the ceteris
paribus caveat in conjunction with the hopelessly mentalistic semantics
of our folk psychology, *is* the folk psychological metaphysics which
you're obsessionally, and fruitlessly peddling. 

-- 
David Longley

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Challenge to the behaviourists #2
    ... take it up with David. ... human behaviour that actually describes a difference between the two ... intentionalism would fail. ... if in this example behaviourism and folk psychology would easily ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
    ... >>them online, but you steadfastly fail to provide any ... > None of what you write is difficult for me to grasp. ... Your own folk psychology limits you; in fact, it is blinding you to your ... > David Longley ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Zenkins paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)
    ... >>them online, but you steadfastly fail to provide any ... > None of what you write is difficult for me to grasp. ... Your own folk psychology limits you; in fact, it is blinding you to your ... > David Longley ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Informix User Forum 2005 - - 5 days left for Registration
    ... David, ... See you next week - Lester ... > After the IIUG fuck up... ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.databases.informix)
  • Re: Finding useful functions- part 1
    ... >Not quite Lester, I'm a super-being, and I'm benevolently playing with ... Yeah, David, you've really got the benevolent part down pat. ... Regards - Lester ...
    (sci.cognitive)