Hi Julian
Yes, exactly because folk psychology is such a well known term, it is
> a term that one cannot use as an authority (there is so much
> divergent accounts of it). It is a bit like saying
> "philosophers/scientists say that X" without mentioning whose theory
> it is. So I meant by "joke" not folk psychology, but the affirmative
> attitude toward such highly disputed concepts like competition,
> stress and a "prospering of individuality".
thanks for clarifying, I see what you mean now and you're absolutely right.
I will have to take another look at that bit and see how I might formulate
it such that it stands up better to academic rigour, or at least talk myself
into allowing that one waffly passage for the sake of tongue-in-cheek.
>(Daniel Dennett's comments about thermostats come to mind). However
> >the Churchlands have spent a great deal of energy trying to
> >discredit it, calling it "a stagnant and degenerating research
> >program"
>
>
> Yes, I think it may be good to at least acknowledge that taking such
> points of view you take a very strong and specific political (I would
> say: "right wing") attitude. I don't know if this is intended, or
> even necessary.
The right-wing political stance is totally unintended, although I see how it
could be interpreted that way (there's the reference to competitive
intelligence in the beginning as well). Something I need to think about.
btw, thanks for sharing the paper!
thanks for the comments and discourse!!
Marcel
Received on Mon Feb 25 2008 - 14:41:44 GMT