[MD] A "Real" Science of Mind

[118]

Hi Marsha,
Thanks for the Opinionater.  Yes, scientific materialism.  And then
there is the other side which claims just as righteously that the
brain cannot be extrapolated to the mind.  Whatever the case,
psychology has been a good source of money for many, and keeps people
busy with explanations.  There is no doubt that these "explanations"
have healing power for some, and therefore cannot be discounted.
There is also the evil side of psychology which is why I consider W.
James to have sold out just a bit.

What a conundrum, damned if we do, damned if we don't.  Can't get a
fair shake in this world where we need to know.  Who stole my cheese?

Cheers,
Mark

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 5:04 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
>     "First, it provides little insight into psychological phenomena...
>
>     Second, brains-in-love talk conflates levels of explanation.
>
>     The third thing wrong with neurobabble is that it has pernicious feedback effects on science itself.  Too much immature science has received massive funding, on the assumption that it illuminates psychology.  The idea that the neural can replace the psychological is the same idea that led to thinking that all psychological ills can be cured with drugs."
>
>
> http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/a-real-science-of-mind/
>
>
> ___
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>