The Limits of Reason

The Limits of Reason (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Brain -> The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 1:31:45 AM)
This explains a lot about what goes on here. Now I know why some people here lie. Bill FTA: Failures of logic, he and cognitive scientist Dan Sperber of the Institut Jean Nicod in Paris propose, are in fact effective ploys to win arguments. That puts poor reasoning in a completely different light. Arguing, after all, is less about seeking truth than about overcoming opposing views. The Limits of Reason Why evolution may favor irrationality. Women are bad drivers, Saddam plotted 9/11, Obama was not born in America, and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: to believe any of these requires suspending some of our critical--thinking faculties and succumbing instead to the kind of irrationality that drives the logically minded crazy. It helps, for instance, to use confirmation bias (seeing and recalling only evidence that supports your beliefs, so you can recount examples of women driving 40mph in the fast lane). It also helps not to test your beliefs against empirical data (where, exactly, are the WMD, after seven years of U.S. forces crawling all over Iraq?); not to subject beliefs to the plausibility test (faking Obama’s birth certificate would require how widespread a conspiracy?); and to be guided by emotion (the loss of thousands of American lives in Iraq feels more justified if we are avenging 9/11). The fact that humans are subject to all these failures of rational thought seems to make no sense. Reason is supposed to be the highest achievement of the human mind, and the route to knowledge and wise decisions. But as psychologists have been documenting since the 1960s, humans are really, really bad at reasoning. It’s not just that we follow our emotions so often, in contexts from voting to ethics. No, even when we intend to deploy the full force of our rational faculties, we are often as ineffectual as eunuchs at an orgy. http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/05/the-limits-of-reason.html "The Thinker" by French sculptor Auguste Rodin. [image]local://upfiles/392475/62D9AE6388834724AD79E367CD38375F.jpg[/image]

joether -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 2:55:08 AM)
Good post. Yes, you hit the nail right on the head: Critical Thinking. Most people never learn that skill, even though its very valuable in a Democracy. And the four paths of thought you start with: A) Women are bad drivers B) Saddam plotted 9/11 C) Obama was not born in America D) Iraq had weapons of mass destruction All deal with a particular group of people, that never learned critical thinking. There is a very simple explaination to: They didnt get a liberal education! Back in the old days, southern businessmen would sent their sons to Harvard, Yale, Brown, and other schools, to get a liberal education. Back then, the word 'liberal' meant very differently from today's 'laymans' term. The idea was, their sons would have a well rounded education, and be able to think for themselves, and not how others wanted them to think. In college, the real learning, comes when students are sitting in the dorm, arguing over a subject. They present evidence, facts, and arguements. Usually someone is the deciding judge on which side presented the better arguement. Its used in the sciences, law schools, medical field, and even in business. You can tell who, the educated types are on these boards pretty easily. That is, if you have an education. And not surprisingly, critical thinking skills, are a lacking component at conservative/religious schools (colleges and universities). Those schools, do not emphasis, the ability to think for yourself, but, to conform to a set standard or dogma. That its not a good idea, to fight for what you think is right, but, to agree with 'the pack'. We see this at political rallies. A very small percentage of conservatives, can actually think for themselves. And those guys, often side with Obama. They may disagree with him, from time to time, but, understand the guy has the country's best interests to heart and mind. The grand majority of conservatives, however: are for what Mr. Obama is against, and against what Mr. Obama is for. It doesnt really matter what the subject is. This group, is automatically opposed to things Mr. Obama is for. He added things in to the health care act, that were suggested by Republicans. And those guys, didnt vote on the very material they said, should be in the bill. That's not 'independant thought', that's 'group think'. However, Brain, there are several different people over the years, who give their ideas on 'reason' or 'reasoning', or the approach to being 'non-animal'. Maslow's Herachy of Needs is one good example. Another is the question: "I could give you $5000 USD today, or $5100 USD, Four days from now. Which would you take?" The irrational answer is 'taking the $5000'. Another irrational concept, is the use of torture. Among conservatives, torture, is only torture, if the torturer, believes, the torturee, is being tortured. Yet, another method, is the way, The Bard, made fun of the nobility. Extra credit, if you know who The Bard is in history. On these boards, how often do we see conservatives, give more then five sentences of text, to explain (in their words, not someone else's), and support their arguement? Rationally, too, I might add? Almost never! Critical Thinking skill(s), are not something conservatives learn. Because, critical thinking skills require someone to think for themselves. Anyone who can think for themselves, can see right through the lies of Fox News almost immediately. When Sarah Palin was asked (while running for Vice President, in 2008), which publications she read on a daily basis. She replied, more or less, that she doesnt read anything. So, to the educated person with critical thinking skills....THAT person....should NEVER become vice president or president! And voted against her! Critical thinking skills, are invaluable! They keep us, as a country from becoming something ugly and evil. From becoming like Germany, 1930. Or one of those banana republic dictatorships. It really is to bad, that conservatives in general are against learning the skill. It would be nice, to have some REAL discussions with adults on politics.

Level -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 3:09:26 AM)
Smugness and reason are not always a good combination.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 3:24:26 AM)
quote: Arguing, after all, is less about seeking truth than about overcoming opposing views. If you're a sophist. Alas, sophistry is alive and well, with many choosing to live your premise. It's certainly true that people act (or react) for emotional reasons. However, emotion does not govern reality, only the false or distorted perceptions of that reality. The two need not be exclusive. Rhetoric, is logos, pathos, and ethos--roughly logic, emotion, and credibility/standing. Or as a 19th century clergy man put it: "Persuasion is logic on fire." I would agree that reason alone is limiting. People have been writing about the dual human reason/passion nature for thousands of years, from Oedipus Rex to A Midsummer Night's Dream to modern science to this guy. But passion with no substance, no firm basis in fact--even to the point of disregard for factual basis--is not rhetoric, but babble. That it's so often embraced makes it none the less so, just all the more sad (and dangerous when applied to matters of importance). It's no way to solve significant problems. It merely perpetuates error.

brainiacsub -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 9:25:26 AM)
joether, What a great post. Really, right on the money. There was another thread a few months back very similar to this one. Here it is for reference: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3187181 I hope this thread gets at least as much attention as that one did. I used to think that critical thinking was a by-product of education and innate intelligence, but not so much anymore after that thread. That experience was hugely disappointing, but also illuminating in many respects. There are several really smart posters who have joined the fray since then so I'll be watching this thread with great interest. I do want to re-emphasize your sentiment that not all conservatives are incapable of critical thought. There are intellectual conservatives among us (not necessarily in these forums, though) and their viewpoint is an important one. We all need to think critically about the role and size of government in our lives and how it affects our relationship with our government and our selves. It is not unreasonable to have a debate about the definition and purpose of a strong national defense. I am not even opposed to discussing topics such as societal moral decay and family values. These things are important. It's just unfortunate that too many conservatives are incapable of engaging in this dialogue in any meaningful way. Good post, though.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 9:58:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub . These things are important. It's just unfortunate that too many conservatives are incapable of engaging in this dialogue in any meaningful way. LMAO. Shades of Tazzy. You come on like you're capable of thoughtfulness and independent thought, albeit it with a slightly left of center leaning, and then you show your true colors with asinine statements like that.

StrangerThan -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 10:04:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether Good post. Yes, you hit the nail right on the head: Critical Thinking. Most people never learn that skill, even though its very valuable in a Democracy. And the four paths of thought you start with: A) Women are bad drivers B) Saddam plotted 9/11 C) Obama was not born in America D) Iraq had weapons of mass destruction All deal with a particular group of people, that never learned critical thinking. There is a very simple explaination to: They didnt get a liberal education! Back in the old days, southern businessmen would sent their sons to Harvard, Yale, Brown, and other schools, to get a liberal education. Back then, the word 'liberal' meant very differently from today's 'laymans' term. The idea was, their sons would have a well rounded education, and be able to think for themselves, and not how others wanted them to think. In college, the real learning, comes when students are sitting in the dorm, arguing over a subject. They present evidence, facts, and arguements. Usually someone is the deciding judge on which side presented the better arguement. Its used in the sciences, law schools, medical field, and even in business. You can tell who, the educated types are on these boards pretty easily. That is, if you have an education. And not surprisingly, critical thinking skills, are a lacking component at conservative/religious schools (colleges and universities). Those schools, do not emphasis, the ability to think for yourself, but, to conform to a set standard or dogma. That its not a good idea, to fight for what you think is right, but, to agree with 'the pack'. We see this at political rallies. A very small percentage of conservatives, can actually think for themselves. And those guys, often side with Obama. They may disagree with him, from time to time, but, understand the guy has the country's best interests to heart and mind. The grand majority of conservatives, however: are for what Mr. Obama is against, and against what Mr. Obama is for. It doesnt really matter what the subject is. This group, is automatically opposed to things Mr. Obama is for. He added things in to the health care act, that were suggested by Republicans. And those guys, didnt vote on the very material they said, should be in the bill. That's not 'independant thought', that's 'group think'. However, Brain, there are several different people over the years, who give their ideas on 'reason' or 'reasoning', or the approach to being 'non-animal'. Maslow's Herachy of Needs is one good example. Another is the question: "I could give you $5000 USD today, or $5100 USD, Four days from now. Which would you take?" The irrational answer is 'taking the $5000'. Another irrational concept, is the use of torture. Among conservatives, torture, is only torture, if the torturer, believes, the torturee, is being tortured. Yet, another method, is the way, The Bard, made fun of the nobility. Extra credit, if you know who The Bard is in history. On these boards, how often do we see conservatives, give more then five sentences of text, to explain (in their words, not someone else's), and support their arguement? Rationally, too, I might add? Almost never! Critical Thinking skill(s), are not something conservatives learn. Because, critical thinking skills require someone to think for themselves. Anyone who can think for themselves, can see right through the lies of Fox News almost immediately. When Sarah Palin was asked (while running for Vice President, in 2008), which publications she read on a daily basis. She replied, more or less, that she doesnt read anything. So, to the educated person with critical thinking skills....THAT person....should NEVER become vice president or president! And voted against her! Critical thinking skills, are invaluable! They keep us, as a country from becoming something ugly and evil. From becoming like Germany, 1930. Or one of those banana republic dictatorships. It really is to bad, that conservatives in general are against learning the skill. It would be nice, to have some REAL discussions with adults on politics. For once, you have points that sort of imply a reasoning ability. A few years ago, Kerry was branded as a flip-flopper. I can't remember the exact details but I'm sure some here can. It was tied to his votes though, maybe the infamous, "I voted for it before I voted against it" quote. I wondered then at the reasoning ability of those who couldn't grasp the concept of changing one's mind. I think a good part of America flip-flopped in the Bush years. I'm going to think that because he entered the fray after 9/11 with something like a 93 percent approval rating and ended it somewhere around 20 percent. You can have your own opinion. Having said that, there is minimal reasoning that takes place on these boards. What, by far, arises is mouths like spigots that spew tripe from either left or right depending on which particular trough of shit they feed. Virtually every discussion has these traits involved. A) Posters refuse to actually debate the issue at hand, but rather dredge through the entire history of the other side to find as many little shitty things as possible they can blame them for. or B) if liberal or conservative poster is pushed into a corner he or she cannot defend, he or she will by default offer the reasoning that the other side did something similar - which is a round about way of saying, fuck it, you did it, now we're going to do it and what's lost is the actuality of right and wrong. In other words, posters will defend a wrong with a wrong. And let's not forget C. If that defense is unsuccessful, poster will scream racism. Actually, C is more of a constant and zealous search for any tidbit that can be branded as such, and if not found, invented. I come from a conservative background and graduated from a liberal arts institution. I find value on both sides when actual conversation occurs. When it doesn't, in cases like 90 percent of the crap you post, I remember what's in the trough where you feed. It's equivalent to what's in the trough where the ultra right feed. Shit eaters are pretty far down on my list of people with whom rational discourse is possible. The truly sad fact of it is, there are resolutions to the problems that face both the country and society. What will come forth however, is going to depend on which party, which set of zealots have power. Therein lies the problem because this country is effectively split in half when it comes to zealots. That means neither side is going to be happy. We aren't fighting this war with guns or bullets. And, it is a war between the leftmost fringe and the rightmost fringe. It is being fought in courtrooms, in legislators who rush legislation through because they're afraid that if they don't, they won't be able to when voters have another crack at them, and in people who huddle behind ideologies that are as full of shit at the extreme as any bull that's ever lived. Where most debates here end up is figuring out what's wrong with another's position rather than what will work with both. That's compromise, something that has been lost and honestly, may never be reclaimed. Most of your post comes from the trough. There are though, interesting hints of logic and sanity in it.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 10:16:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan A few years ago, Kerry was branded as a flip-flopper. I can't remember the exact details but I'm sure some here can. It was tied to his votes though, maybe the infamous, "I voted for it before I voted against it" quote. I wondered then at the reasoning ability of those who couldn't grasp the concept of changing one's mind. "Changing one's mind" based on new information or a genuine change in beliefs is one thing. Changing one's mind for political expediency was what earned Kerry his flippers.

subrob1967 -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 10:31:06 AM)
Both the author, and Joe should really consider some critical thinking for themselves... quote: Iraq is known to have used the blister agent mustard gas from 1983 and the nerve gas Tabun from 1985, as it faced attacks from "human waves" of Iranian troops and poorly-trained but loyal volunteers. Tabun can kill within minutes. In 1988 Iraq turned its chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds in the north of the country. Some Kurdish guerrilla forces had joined the Iranian offensive. On 16 March 1988, Iraq dropped bombs containing mustard gas, Sarin and Tabun on the Kurdish city of Halabja. Source To date, I've never seen anyone of credibility claim that Saddam masterminded the 9/11 attack, care to show me different?

popeye1250 -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 10:41:15 AM)
I'm getting a mental picture of Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow astride a nuclear bomb that's just been dropped out of a bomber ala Chill Wills screaming "YEEE-HAWWW!!!!!"

juliaoceania -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 11:13:19 AM)
When I was in my mid 30s I went to a shrink for about a year. I was in the process of finishing my second degree. Here I was, someone who took logic classes and argumentation classes (to prepare for grad school) and I was completely in my head. I was totally stuck on logic and being "rational". I even had successfully diagnosed myself before my shrink did as having PTSD, which I worked on making into just regular GA... This doctor would get very frustrated with me. He said that my intellect was blocking my progress under his care because I expected life to be a logical and rational process. Human beings are neither rational or logical, and life is not a logical or rational process. This doctor was an Atheist, by the way, but he was a believer in what he called the "relaxation response" (what I call meditation, and what religious people call prayer). Here is the thing, logic and rationality have their place in the world. They are wonderful tools that human beings employ. If you expect that human beings will ever be completely logical and rational, forget it.... we aren't made that way. Back to my story, I only got rid of my anxiety by becoming a non-resistant person. I got in touch with my heart place. I spent time meditating, being in touch with my spiritual side. And I accepted the fact I am an illogical human being For you, perhaps human logic is our crowing achievement as a species, I disagree with you... I think our crowning achievement is that we can see beauty and feel emotion and create based upon that. And when we create we elicit those feelings in each other... we are the gods we worship, we are the creators of both good and evil. We have the power to love and to appreciate and to experience.... In the end, with all my education and learning, I have discovered it is meaning that I am after... not being right, not being logical, and certainly not trying to make other people rational

joether -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 11:57:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub . These things are important. It's just unfortunate that too many conservatives are incapable of engaging in this dialogue in any meaningful way. LMAO. Shades of Tazzy. You come on like you're capable of thoughtfulness and independent thought, albeit it with a slightly left of center leaning, and then you show your true colors with asinine statements like that. ...Enter, stage left, one of the conservatives without critical thinking skills.... Do you have anything, even semi-intelligent to add to this discussion, willbeurdaddy? Please, I just railed the conservatives on here, for not being able to hold a real discussion. And almost on que, you step in, and demonstrate, to a 'T', of my arguement. quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub I do want to re-emphasize your sentiment that not all conservatives are incapable of critical thought. Lets say there is a room of 100 conservatives. Five of them, hold real, critical thinking skills, five more, hold partical critical thinking skills. The other 90, do not. The ten would talk, in a reasonable, normal fashion. Unfortunately, its drown out, by the other 90, who are shouting at the top of their lungs. One, just wont hear the reason and thought, over the pure mindlessness. A few years back, there was an episode on college campuses across America. It stemmed from the idea, that students were complaining, that professors were challenging their political thoughts. That the students were feeling 'singled out'. Not surprisingly, the ones complaining the loudest, were also the ones who held the most conservative dogma. The truth of the matter, plain as daylight to me: Professors challenge EVERYONE's view point on politics. But they dont do it to be mean and hateful. They do it, to see if the student can form arguements, and defend those arguements. Not surprisingly, many conservatives, could do neither, and had many problems trying to pass courses that were dependant on 'critical thinking skills'. Like philosophy, medicine, ethics (business, law, etc), science, and mathematics. A rather large number, of conservatives, would rather remain stupid and uneducated, rather then enjoy the freedoms they have as Americans. Why is it, that Fox News, typically, and on a daily basis, pours our misinformation and lying on facts? They know, those conservatives, that watch it, will never question what they are told. It forms the basis of their understanding of the world. It's rather ironic, that they complain about such things as 'The New World Order', George Orwell's '1984', and fear of socialism/communism. And yet, they are the first, to embrace these values, IF, it comes from Fox News. I scratch my head, to how a people, so paranoid of being controlled, accept control so readily. Of course, if one, speaks in a long, drawn out thought, most conservatives simply tune the conservation out. It becomes to hard, to complicated, to tiresome on their brains. My observations on this board, is, the ones that make, carefully, drawn out arguements, are RARILY challenged by conservatives. And when they are, the conservative poster, states an 'arguement', and 'support' of less then five sentences. If greater, its always been a 'cut/paste' job. The poster, pretty much, lets someone else explain things, as they themselves, are incapable of doing themselves.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:03:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I think our crowning achievement is that we can see beauty and feel emotion and create based upon that If it is "our" crowning achievement the implication is that lower animals can not see /appreciate beauty and feel emotion(and I'll leave out the lower primates that are so close to us that the lines would be blurred in any discussion). I disagree with that implication. The experience of beauty and emotions are evidenced by chemical/electrical reactions that are also found in many animals. That eliminates anthropomorphizing as a debate point. OTOH it is far harder to support a notion that lower animals exhibit logical thought. so, if indeed Brain's premise is that logic is our crowning achievement I agree with him, maybe for the first time evah!

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:04:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub . These things are important. It's just unfortunate that too many conservatives are incapable of engaging in this dialogue in any meaningful way. LMAO. Shades of Tazzy. You come on like you're capable of thoughtfulness and independent thought, albeit it with a slightly left of center leaning, and then you show your true colors with asinine statements like that. ...Enter, stage left, one of the conservatives without critical thinking skills.... Do you have anything, even semi-intelligent to add to this discussion, willbeurdaddy? Please, I just railed the conservatives on here, for not being able to hold a real discussion. And almost on que, you step in, and demonstrate, to a 'T', of my arguement. quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub I do want to re-emphasize your sentiment that not all conservatives are incapable of critical thought. Lets say there is a room of 100 conservatives. Five of them, hold real, critical thinking skills, five more, hold partical critical thinking skills. The other 90, do not. The ten would talk, in a reasonable, normal fashion. Unfortunately, its drown out, by the other 90, who are shouting at the top of their lungs. One, just wont hear the reason and thought, over the pure mindlessness. A few years back, there was an episode on college campuses across America. It stemmed from the idea, that students were complaining, that professors were challenging their political thoughts. That the students were feeling 'singled out'. Not surprisingly, the ones complaining the loudest, were also the ones who held the most conservative dogma. The truth of the matter, plain as daylight to me: Professors challenge EVERYONE's view point on politics. But they dont do it to be mean and hateful. They do it, to see if the student can form arguements, and defend those arguements. Not surprisingly, many conservatives, could do neither, and had many problems trying to pass courses that were dependant on 'critical thinking skills'. Like philosophy, medicine, ethics (business, law, etc), science, and mathematics. A rather large number, of conservatives, would rather remain stupid and uneducated, rather then enjoy the freedoms they have as Americans. Why is it, that Fox News, typically, and on a daily basis, pours our misinformation and lying on facts? They know, those conservatives, that watch it, will never question what they are told. It forms the basis of their understanding of the world. It's rather ironic, that they complain about such things as 'The New World Order', George Orwell's '1984', and fear of socialism/communism. And yet, they are the first, to embrace these values, IF, it comes from Fox News. I scratch my head, to how a people, so paranoid of being controlled, accept control so readily. Of course, if one, speaks in a long, drawn out thought, most conservatives simply tune the conservation out. It becomes to hard, to complicated, to tiresome on their brains. My observations on this board, is, the ones that make, carefully, drawn out arguements, are RARILY challenged by conservatives. And when they are, the conservative poster, states an 'arguement', and 'support' of less then five sentences. If greater, its always been a 'cut/paste' job. The poster, pretty much, lets someone else explain things, as they themselves, are incapable of doing themselves. Im not getting into a pissing match over critical thinking skills with someone who hasnt shown the slightest ability to do anything but regurgitate leftie talking points.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:30:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I think our crowning achievement is that we can see beauty and feel emotion and create based upon that If it is "our" crowning achievement the implication is that lower animals can not see /appreciate beauty and feel emotion(and I'll leave out the lower primates that are so close to us that the lines would be blurred in any discussion). I disagree with that implication. The experience of beauty and emotions are evidenced by chemical/electrical reactions that are also found in many animals. That eliminates anthropomorphizing as a debate point. OTOH it is far harder to support a notion that lower animals exhibit logical thought. so, if indeed Brain's premise is that logic is our crowning achievement I agree with him, maybe for the first time evah! So you think Homo sapiens are the only species ever capable of logic?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:35:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I think our crowning achievement is that we can see beauty and feel emotion and create based upon that If it is "our" crowning achievement the implication is that lower animals can not see /appreciate beauty and feel emotion(and I'll leave out the lower primates that are so close to us that the lines would be blurred in any discussion). I disagree with that implication. The experience of beauty and emotions are evidenced by chemical/electrical reactions that are also found in many animals. That eliminates anthropomorphizing as a debate point. OTOH it is far harder to support a notion that lower animals exhibit logical thought. so, if indeed Brain's premise is that logic is our crowning achievement I agree with him, maybe for the first time evah! So you think Homo sapiens are the only species ever capable of logic? other than lower primates, yes.

juliaoceania -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:39:47 PM)
Well, I do not think I would disagree with that necessarily Although we do not know much about how dolphins think, if we want to get all technical about it. Edited to add http://news.discovery.com/animals/dolphins-smarter-brain-function.html and from google scholar http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS366&q=dolphin%20intelligence&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws

Moonhead -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:41:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 To date, I've never seen anyone of credibility claim that Saddam masterminded the 9/11 attack, care to show me different? The chimp had no credibility? I know the evil libs thought that, but surely you lads disagree?

Moonhead -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:42:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Well, I do not think I would disagree with that necessarily Although we do not know much about how dolphins think, if we want to get all technical about it. Or elephants. Very smart animals which some zoologists suspect have a language.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Limits of Reason (8/6/2010 12:43:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Well, I do not think I would disagree with that necessarily Although we do not know much about how dolphins think, if we want to get all technical about it. Actually we know they arent capable of much in the way of processing thought, since they have so few neurons despite their relatively large brains...if you want to get all technical about it.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125