I think actual blindness since birth has been proven to work like you would have expected this to work, that is, your brain is not capable of interpreting the signals even if they can be made to occur/reach it. (I guess it must have to do with age though, I can't see - no pun - why a six-months-old wouldn't be able to learn to see.) If this is so, apparently knowing how to see is of a different order of magnitude than what colors you see. Anyhow, it would be truly amazing to hear from an ex-colorblind person about the experience of seeing a to him completely new color.
Imagine being on a spot in spacewise 2-dimensional universe. One kind of time could be like moving within this area, time passing, the other like not moving spacewise but only timewise, so that you'd walk through the "absolutely" same spot, but through time, not space. Imagine popping from frame to frame in the Game of Life-simulation, not moving sideways but only to the next frame, and the next. I dunno if this was clear though...?
Perhaps two dimensions of time is like you could go not only forward and backward in time (not that you can), but also up and down, moving "within" what we now think of as a unit of time. I can imagine such a concept could come in handy to explain mysterious things like action at a distance (gravity, QM).
Wild-guess-answer: A hypersphere and a torus share a formula (don't recall for what though, volume perhaps), though they are not the same thing. Perhaps there's a formal mathematical analogy somewhere in there?
I used to be a grammar and spelling Nazi, which probably was a symptom of my obsessive compulsive disorder. Now that it is taken care of (medicated), I write worse, spell worse, make homophonic mistakes etc, and do not care so much about whether other people write properly or not. Years of typing made no difference at all though. But being a grammar and spelling Nazi may, I take from my own experience, be about being undiagnosed, not about being correct.
I thought he was funny, that makes me a troll? No trolling intended anyhow, if I understand the term correctly. (I should do, being a moderator elsewhere.) Anyhow, excuses to whomever took this as a way of making fun OF someone instead of joining in the joke, which was the intent.
But can the chihuahua be reverted into a wolf or something wolflike? It could be argued that Nature would never produce chihuahuas, but that it does produce wolfs.
"external force trying to achieve these alterations by exerting absolute control over breeding""
That force could very well be a change in the environment. That is, there is no need for any conscious control or Controller (Designer). Evolution is slow when there is no need for it, but death to the unfit makes change happen pretty fast.
Well, as they are able to reproduce they are not less robust. Things have changed. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean survival of those who go to the gym but survival of those best fitted to the environment in which they live. Surviving into an age where you can reproduce yourself is ALL that counts. THAT's evolution.
You just explained something very fundamental about the propagation of the species. Thing is, though, people may have other reasons to procreate than to have successful books published. Unfortunately?
When comparing cultures, you must compare on the same level. That is, you cannot put the philosophers of the East against the drug abusers of the West (or vice versa). Popular culture against popular, high culture against high culture. If you do it that way, it will mostly come down to your personal preferences, at least if you compare the higher expressions. Besides, cultures are not monolithic and interact and intersect in a multitude of ways.
But would you not say that good knowledge of language and math helps a person to develop his intelligence towards its optimum (assuming there is any such thing)? I'd consider both language and math kinds of knowledge management, making thinking processes â" if they are essentially non-verbal and non-mathematical â" more efficient. And is not that what intelligence IS; thinking efficiently?
Do I sum you up correctly by saying that what is intelligent varies with circumstance?
I have no source, but I think it has been shown that when humans select for mating, a decently intelligent partner is one of the most important criteria, which is why the IQ gets higher and higher with every generation.
I think autism, ADHD and diagnoses like that are proving your point. These people would only have survived in VERY sheltered surroundings earlier on, being propagated only in very narrow (and probably affluent) circles. Nowadays, the traits of people who are untypical neurologically compared to the rest of the population probably rises when "natural selection" does not work against them. Note also that these traits may very well be valuable in various ways to the general population, it's just that in the bad old days, those who had them never lived long enough to show them. This, in turn, means that the human race gets more diversified genetically, which is in itself a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
I think actual blindness since birth has been proven to work like you would have expected this to work, that is, your brain is not capable of interpreting the signals even if they can be made to occur/reach it. (I guess it must have to do with age though, I can't see - no pun - why a six-months-old wouldn't be able to learn to see.) If this is so, apparently knowing how to see is of a different order of magnitude than what colors you see. Anyhow, it would be truly amazing to hear from an ex-colorblind person about the experience of seeing a to him completely new color.
Imagine being on a spot in spacewise 2-dimensional universe. One kind of time could be like moving within this area, time passing, the other like not moving spacewise but only timewise, so that you'd walk through the "absolutely" same spot, but through time, not space. Imagine popping from frame to frame in the Game of Life-simulation, not moving sideways but only to the next frame, and the next. I dunno if this was clear though...?
Perhaps two dimensions of time is like you could go not only forward and backward in time (not that you can), but also up and down, moving "within" what we now think of as a unit of time. I can imagine such a concept could come in handy to explain mysterious things like action at a distance (gravity, QM).
Wild-guess-answer: A hypersphere and a torus share a formula (don't recall for what though, volume perhaps), though they are not the same thing. Perhaps there's a formal mathematical analogy somewhere in there?
I used to be a grammar and spelling Nazi, which probably was a symptom of my obsessive compulsive disorder. Now that it is taken care of (medicated), I write worse, spell worse, make homophonic mistakes etc, and do not care so much about whether other people write properly or not. Years of typing made no difference at all though. But being a grammar and spelling Nazi may, I take from my own experience, be about being undiagnosed, not about being correct.
I thought he was funny, that makes me a troll? No trolling intended anyhow, if I understand the term correctly. (I should do, being a moderator elsewhere.) Anyhow, excuses to whomever took this as a way of making fun OF someone instead of joining in the joke, which was the intent.
At last things make sense!
Would it not be easier to have AI-bots identify the humans instead of the other way around? Humans are so unreliable!
This 2D-plane that you refer to is the one in which the majority of the material in the solar system moves.
Well, amateur astronomers observing actually have made quite a few important contributions to the science of astronomy.
But can the chihuahua be reverted into a wolf or something wolflike? It could be argued that Nature would never produce chihuahuas, but that it does produce wolfs.
The time it takes depends upon what craves the change. If an asteroid would hit earth, evolution would work very very quickly (see Dinosaurs).
"external force trying to achieve these alterations by exerting absolute control over breeding""
That force could very well be a change in the environment. That is, there is no need for any conscious control or Controller (Designer). Evolution is slow when there is no need for it, but death to the unfit makes change happen pretty fast.
Well, as they are able to reproduce they are not less robust. Things have changed. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean survival of those who go to the gym but survival of those best fitted to the environment in which they live. Surviving into an age where you can reproduce yourself is ALL that counts. THAT's evolution.
You just explained something very fundamental about the propagation of the species. Thing is, though, people may have other reasons to procreate than to have successful books published. Unfortunately?
No-no. December 2012 is still a few steps down the road.
I did not check "Post Anonymously"?
When comparing cultures, you must compare on the same level. That is, you cannot put the philosophers of the East against the drug abusers of the West (or vice versa). Popular culture against popular, high culture against high culture. If you do it that way, it will mostly come down to your personal preferences, at least if you compare the higher expressions. Besides, cultures are not monolithic and interact and intersect in a multitude of ways.
But would you not say that good knowledge of language and math helps a person to develop his intelligence towards its optimum (assuming there is any such thing)? I'd consider both language and math kinds of knowledge management, making thinking processes â" if they are essentially non-verbal and non-mathematical â" more efficient. And is not that what intelligence IS; thinking efficiently?
Do I sum you up correctly by saying that what is intelligent varies with circumstance?
I have no source, but I think it has been shown that when humans select for mating, a decently intelligent partner is one of the most important criteria, which is why the IQ gets higher and higher with every generation.
I think autism, ADHD and diagnoses like that are proving your point. These people would only have survived in VERY sheltered surroundings earlier on, being propagated only in very narrow (and probably affluent) circles. Nowadays, the traits of people who are untypical neurologically compared to the rest of the population probably rises when "natural selection" does not work against them. Note also that these traits may very well be valuable in various ways to the general population, it's just that in the bad old days, those who had them never lived long enough to show them. This, in turn, means that the human race gets more diversified genetically, which is in itself a good thing.
How did they make you pay for this ant study? They never approached me!
It's even more efficient if you make that line a continuous one turning now and then; that is, a pentagram. They HATE pentagrams.
But it doesn't matter for the purpose of the study. The wrongs in the top of the scale and the wrongs in the bottom even out. That is statistics.
I think.
Read a lot of Nietzsche, do you?