"Bassos" wrote in message
news:48cec1bb$0$3113$e4fe514c@dreader19.news.xs4all.nl...
>
> Ofcourse you are aware that 'up to date' neuroscience does not claim to be
> able to map anything.
> Yes, the theories are interesting.
> But no, there is no actual convincing evidence for a singular theory.
> You could know this by keeping up to date.
>
> Hell, The best researched bit of cortex is the Ocipital lobe, you know,
> vision.
> Up to today they are still looking for 'pictures' in the brain, instead of
> change.
>
> Wait, could the brain be an organ sensitive to change ?
> Oh wait, it is....
>
> Now know that nobody knows how the mind works, and any book claiming to
> know by it's title is suspect.
>
> So, do tell, what does Dr. Steven Pinker say about how the mind works ?
> We can all use a good laugh.
>
> I could mention stuff that is not understood which makes his booktitle
> hilarious, but you should already know this.
>
>
I am not subscribed to the paid articles but thought you would find
this blurb from a legal articles site interesting in context of this thread.
I read another article about this this morning (on Huffington I think) but
this one is excellent
mk5000
"Wallace wrote about this subject in his brilliant essay about how watching
Roger Federer play tennis was, for him, akin to having a religious
experience.
Wallace wrote:
Beauty is not the goal of competitive sports, but high-level sports are a
prime venue for the expression of human beauty. The relation is roughly that
of courage to war.
The human beauty we're talking about here is beauty of a particular type; it
might be called kinetic beauty. Its power and appeal are universal. It has
nothing to do with sex or cultural norms. What it seems to have to do with,
really, is human beings' reconciliation with the fact of having a body.
"--
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/lifeofkings/2008/09/the_genius_of_david_foster_wal...
