Theme: Science

  • “We are not meddling with nature, we are accepting its rules and working within

    —“We are not meddling with nature, we are accepting its rules and working within them.”–Martin Štěpán


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-07 16:12:00 UTC

  • “Does William James belong to the “anglo science” team?”— anglo = british, sco

    —“Does William James belong to the “anglo science” team?”—

    anglo = british, scottish, american etc. and ‘radical’ empiricism.

    Technically I would say yes. But you just gave me an idea, which is to chart the development of psychology by pseudoscientific(jewish), literary/continental(german-jung), and scientific (anglo-james et all) That might be a fun thing to draw up.

    So to understand James, think about his time frame. We had theological idealism, then philosophical idealism, then Darwin, and then we had empiricism and pragmatism. So he was part of the transition from Freud(pseudoscience), to Jung (continental literature), and to James (anglo empiricism) and Pareto

    As in all things.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-07 09:27:00 UTC

  • There is. Absolutely. The question is whether people will tolerate it in the pre

    There is. Absolutely. The question is whether people will tolerate it in the present any more than they did darwin. And whether it is possible to govern within it, when the result can only be eugenics.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-07 04:06:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1203163894958690305

    Reply addressees: @Outsideness

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1203154282448445441


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Outsideness

    … “‘Epistemological integrity’ — is there a pill for that?”

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1203154282448445441

  • The ‘market’ between the two ends of the spectrum seems to be necessary to prese

    The ‘market’ between the two ends of the spectrum seems to be necessary to preserve the value of either, without either going off the deep end into sophistry, pseudoscience, and outright deceit.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-06 14:21:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202956243335299073

    Reply addressees: @DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s I’d love to have this conversation, because I’m frustrated by the conflict between continental success at a ‘secular theology’ using philosophy (pedagogy) vs with jurisprudence and science (decidability). Must we retain multiple literatures from empathic to analytic? Appears so.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @DuchesneRicardo @h0b0spic3s I’d love to have this conversation, because I’m frustrated by the conflict between continental success at a ‘secular theology’ using philosophy (pedagogy) vs with jurisprudence and science (decidability). Must we retain multiple literatures from empathic to analytic? Appears so.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202955246194040834

  • Followup: Everyday language is WRONG or it wouldn’t need reorganization. So, it’

    Followup: Everyday language is WRONG or it wouldn’t need reorganization. So, it’s like asking me to state science in theological prose. It can’t be done. The purpose of philosophy is to REORGANIZE the common paradigms in response to scientific innovation: To adapt. It’s work.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-06 14:12:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202954076574670854

    Reply addressees: @StanGalerius

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202952765778980864


    IN REPLY TO:

    @StanGalerius

    @curtdoolittle Structured in every day language, would spread the word further.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202952765778980864

  • NEGATIVA IN INTELLIGENCE: GENETIC LOAD CAUSES STUPIDITY A somewhat popular post

    http://www.wiringthebrain.com/2012/07/genetics-of-stupidity.htmlVIA NEGATIVA IN INTELLIGENCE: GENETIC LOAD CAUSES STUPIDITY

    A somewhat popular post from ’12 that made the rounds. It follows my understanding that the size of the brain largely determines its capacity for intelligence and that the accumulation of defects causes stupidity, rather than, intelligence being a specific modification. This would mirror the data in that intelligence seems to be produced by many sequences. Or conversely, that many sequences can inhibit intelligence.

    http://www.wiringthebrain.com/2012/07/genetics-of-stupidity.html?Updated Dec 6, 2019, 8:33 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-06 08:33:00 UTC

  • IF THIS HOLDS UP, THAT’S THE END OF LONG TERM USE OF THE PILL – AND IT EXPLAINS

    IF THIS HOLDS UP, THAT’S THE END OF LONG TERM USE OF THE PILL – AND IT EXPLAINS … A LOT.

    Key brain region smaller in birth control pill users

    Neuroscience News

    Summary: A new neuroimaging study reveals women who take oral contraception have reduced hypothalamic volume compared to women who do not take the pill. Smaller hypothalamic volume was associated with increased negative emotions and depression risk.

    Source: RSNA

    Researchers studying the brain found that women taking oral contraceptives, commonly known as birth control pills, had significantly smaller hypothalamus volume, compared to women not taking the pill, according to a new study presented today at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA).

    Located at the base of the brain above the pituitary gland, the hypothalamus produces hormones and helps regulate essential bodily functions including body temperature, mood, appetite, sex drive, sleep cycles and heart rate.

    Structural effects of sex hormones, including oral contraceptive pills, on the human hypothalamus have never been reported, according to the researchers. This may be in part because validated methods to quantitatively analyze MRI exams of the hypothalamus have not been available.

    “There is a lack of research on the effects of oral contraceptives on this small but essential part of the living human brain,” said Michael L. Lipton, M.D., Ph.D., FACR, professor of radiology at the Gruss Magnetic Resonance Research Center at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and medical director of MRI Services at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City. “We validated methods for assessing the volume of the hypothalamus and confirm, for the first time, that current oral contraceptive pill usage is associated with smaller hypothalamic volume.”

    Oral contraceptives are among the most popular forms of birth control and are also used to treat a host of conditions, including irregular menstruation, cramps, acne, endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome. According to a 2018 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics, from 2015 to 2017 approximately 47 million women aged 15-49 in the U.S. reported current use of contraceptives. Of those, 12.6% used the pill.

    In his study, Dr. Lipton and colleagues recruited a group of 50 healthy women, including 21 women who were taking oral contraceptives. All 50 women underwent brain MRI, and a validated approach was used to measure hypothalamic volume.

    This shows the brain scans of the hypothalamus

    Brain MRI depicting hypothalamus in red. The image is credited to the study author and RSNA.

    “We found a dramatic difference in the size of the brain structures between women who were taking oral contraceptives and those who were not,” Dr. Lipton said. “This initial study shows a strong association and should motivate further investigation into the effects of oral contraceptives on brain structure and their potential impact on brain function.”

    Other findings from the study, which Dr. Lipton described as “preliminary,” were that smaller hypothalamic volume was also associated with greater anger and showed a strong correlation with depressive symptoms. However, the study found no significant correlation between hypothalamic volume and cognitive performance.

    Co-authors are Ke Xun Chen, M.D., Sandie Worley, B.S., Henry J. Foster, B.S., David Edasery, M.D., Shima Roknsharifi, M.D., and Chloe Ifrah, B.A.

    Funding: The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and by The Dana Foundation.Updated Dec 5, 2019, 8:59 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-05 20:59:00 UTC

  • We defeat the red queen of nature’s laws by innovating and adapting faster than

    We defeat the red queen of nature’s laws by innovating and adapting faster than all others. We do not deny she exists, or seek unity in an equality that provides psychological comfort given our position in the genetic hierarchy. We seek unity in Heroism and Tragedy, as we evolve.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-05 15:55:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202617592403431429

    Reply addressees: @MsMelChen

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202617029125115905


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @MsMelChen I am european: unity through heroism and tragedy: Truth before Face, Reciprocity, Productivity, and markets before authority, so that we live in the optimum condition possible for man as we continuously transform ourselves from beasts into the gods we imagine.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202617029125115905


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @MsMelChen I am european: unity through heroism and tragedy: Truth before Face, Reciprocity, Productivity, and markets before authority, so that we live in the optimum condition possible for man as we continuously transform ourselves from beasts into the gods we imagine.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1202617029125115905

  • Evolution by natural selection. Kind of a dumb question right? What’s the differ

    Evolution by natural selection. Kind of a dumb question right? What’s the difference between natural selection whether it’s animals that can’t think or us that can? Nothing.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-04 19:02:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202302075297763332

    Reply addressees: @natrolleon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202295300817162240


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202295300817162240

  • If it was simple it wouldn’t have taken aristotle, the empirical, scientific, an

    If it was simple it wouldn’t have taken aristotle, the empirical, scientific, and the american technological revolutions to solve it. You either grasp that Darwin applies to all life; our law of reciprocity produces markets; and our markets adaptation and eugenics – or you don’t.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-04 18:30:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202294058393178115

    Reply addressees: @natrolleon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202292243173785600


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1202292243173785600