>
> "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.