People (wrongly) think they are clever because they find no fault in their own reasoning

… as they don’t know how to do objective and bounce between the two. ~ pet theory


Answer the initial question before coming back.

I went for B.
B for brain damage by oxygen deprivation. Drowning is forensically suffocation with face submerged in water.
Terrible example to choose, or wonderful, if you see idiots such as this as negative examples to learn by.

“These findings suggest there may be an important distinction between the literal act of thinking about humans as biological mechanisms (scientific reasoning), and a process of social objectification.” Yes. Except being a pseud, he takes the wrong path and assumes the made-up one is real because feelings.

“As the images show and the earlier post explained, mentalistic thinking inhibits mechanistic areas, and vice versa.” Because they are different mental states and it’s reflected in biological reality. Yet, the brain can go from ONE to ANOTHER and…. BACK AGAIN. Isn’t that just dandy?

Sadly, his point about free will within behavioural genetics is true, which makes the odious miscommunication worse.
Beware of bad metaphors.

Examine yourself. Do not lapse in your final meaning to suffice short term limitations. The mistake was an inappropriate lapse, an assumption he knew enough of drowning from heuristic knowledge (social script, CSI post-mortem) to use it as an example.

This dichotomy is caused by the differences in LEARNING (and retrieval, later). Compare electrons moving as water to electron shells. Former is useful for electricians. Latter for theoretical physicists. BOTH are correct in differing context. Communicated form depends on your use of the information. There are books on this. An organic chemist would still see something else different (negatively charged elements) looking at the same material. This is the reason for boundary setting in science: physics, chemistry/biology, electrical engineering. Each schema or mode of operation for that variant is functional.


A person can be right/wrong and smart/stupid within the same sentence. Objective > Subject
Put like that, it doesn’t sound so hard, does it?


One response to “People (wrongly) think they are clever because they find no fault in their own reasoning

  1. A difference between knowledge and wisdom. The scholar can conjure up clever devices of logic, but testing against experiential activity it rises or falls.

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s