Search results

Lanugo was confused about subjunctive because the rules for subjunctive are very different and more rigid in German. That's ok though Germans get frustrated with English speakers all the time because our language is too creative with grammar. I'm not trying to lecture. I understand where...

Zhao, we can look at fossils and skeletal remains of early humans and immediately see that people were not in "superb" health just because they lived in less economically stratified societies. What is clear is that you have no real understanding of the actual scope of the topic you've made...

LOL. Zhao, you've talked openly on the board about your problems with your parents beings scientists, how you resented them for their overly rigid values and views, and how they mistreated you. Want links? I like how you accuse me of somehow bringing to light some "private" correspondence...

I would think any native speaker of English would immediately spot the difference (tho, yes, it's a subtle one) between these two sentences: "It would be nice if people shut up." "It would be nice if people would shut up." In the first, the sense of time implied by leaving out the subjunctive...

:rolleyes: Am I supposed to be impressed? I was taught grammar in English, German, Attic Greek, Spanish, and French. There's nothing wrong with that sentence, Lanugo. It's a subjunctive clause. If people would. Nothing wrong with using subjunctive there. Language is fluid, it evolves, and...

But then, by that definition of the term "reduction" or "reductive", everything is a reduction. Eating a sandwich is a reduction, because you could possibly eat cereal or have a banana. Or walking three steps to the left instead of to the right is a reductive move because it's a decisive action...

Hm?

This is what religion/religious sects do by definition. The word "reductive" gets thrown around a lot on here, and I don't think many of you have a clue how to use it in any meaningfully precise way. There is a spectrum that includes a range of degrees of "reductive" approach, even within the...

Are you trying to imply that artists are superior to construction workers? I wouldn't have a dog or cat, after seeing a bunch of cultures another lab took of cats' and dogs' saliva.

Ha nice Madonna :: Lady Gaga as Lil Kim :: Nicki Minaj

OMG, I love Gina Gershon, and I l o v e that movie.

She has a really nice body. Life is unfair.

No, you're exactly right. Blood, sweat, tears, and a few moments here and there of leisure time or fun or pleasure or whatever. Take them as they come, basically. Isn't there an entire book of the Old Testament about this? It's always been this way. Try not to make the world an even shittier...

Believe it or not, the way our brains function hasn't changed all that drastically in terms of basic cognitive capacity in the past several thousand years. Baboons and other primates have cognitive faculties similar to ours. We're not actually all that impressive in intelligence. We have to...

I can't wait to take neurophys...

Anyway, maybe you want to reflect on a few semesters of neurophysiology, neurochemistry, genetics, and the epidemiology of neurological disorders.

No, scientific theories are built on hypotheses, which are tested, or test-able (aka "falsifiability"). If you don't have a set of hypotheses that are falsifiable, you won't be able to build a coherent scientific theory. The fact that the LHC comes into being within in the space-time...

We can access reality through testing hypotheses. And testing. And retesting. And peer reviewing our results. And retesting. Kant is pretty much the correlationist par excellence, according to Meillassoux or whatever his name is. I'm not accusing him of this, the Speculative Realists are...

What do you mean? Have you not noticed that there are about four new branches of realism in philosophy and that it's very not cool to be a "correlationist" (someone who believes after Kant basically that the world only exists insofar as it is perceived by minds, and that there is no world...

But the question was whether they were setting out to understand the world with an irrational or a rational attitude, not a scientific versus and unscientific one. It turns out that people aren't either "irrational" or "rational", and that rationality and irrationality aren't hats people can...