A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I'm begining to think that Peacegirl is a particularly 'needy' individual. She's on this thread desperately trying to find someone who will agree with her fathers book and validate her belief in it. It makes me wonder if Lessans job as a salesman kept him away from home and his daughter. She could have developed an unusual attatchment to him due to the absence. This would explain her plea's for everyone to read the book uncritically and accept the ideas of her father without question. The questions and objections are obviously disturbing her and inhibiting her ability to rationally answer those questions and objections. Indeed her floundering about on this thread seems to be just as irrational as her fathers book. I would seriously recomend that she seek professional help.

Would you stop it doc. I don't need professional help. My father was around all the time. I loved him very much because of the person he was. I didn't have an unusual attachment; but I did have a loving father/daughter relationship.

As far as your faulty conclusions that my being here has something to do with my childhood is so off the mark that I can say no more. I am not floundering, and I'm answering the questions to the best of my ability. Take it or leave it. I'm not forcing anybody to click on this thread.

[LadyShea]

In the present study, we developed a new behavioural test, to characterize selective attention towards humans. In the task, the dogs were exposed to the owner and an unfamiliar person, repeatedly entering the experimental room and leaving through different doors; at the end of the sequence the dogs were allowed to approach the doors. Attention was measured as the average length of gaze bouts and as the overall duration of visual orientation towards the different targets. Dogs gave preferential attention to the owner, who received longer gaze bouts and greater overall attention than the stranger. The preference was confirmed by the significant proportion of dogs that directed attention to the owner’s door at the end of the task. A modified version of the task was employed to measure dogs’ attention when the person’s head was not visible. This condition caused a decrease in attention parameters towards the owner. To determine the effects of old age on attention, the two tasks were then administered to dogs aged 7 years and older. Compared to adults, aged dogs showed lower owner-directed attention when the owner was not in sight and were more likely not to move at the end of the task. The results provide the first evidence that dogs’ interspecific attention depends on the nature of the dog–human relationship, on the availability of some distinctive features of the social stimulus and on the age of the dog.

Selective attention to humans in companion dogs, Canis familiaris
Animal Behaviour, Volume 80, Issue 6, December 2010, Pages 1057-1063
Paolo Mongillo, Gabriele Bono, Lucia Regolin and Lieta Marinelli

Here's another study abstract indicating facial recognition in dogs

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Lessans chose to make specific claims regarding time and sight and instantaneous transfer of information....yet he didn't know enough about these topics to avoid contradicting the empirical findings of multiple disciplines of science.

To say it's an instant transfer of information is misleading. It sounds like this information is traveling (through time and space) faster than the speed of light. You're not comparing apples to apples. He knew a lot about what he needed to know about. You keep forgetting that his astute observations were valid, where many empirical tests are not.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

He could have used nothing but psychology to make a case for conditioning, and really there would be no way to refute it empirically because psychology isn't as easy to test as physics and optics. He made his bed though, and you have to lie in it*

He did not make false claims, so there's no bed to lie in. Psychology is a very interesting field but it's very theoretical. You're right, it's not as black and white as physics or math. Interestingly enough, even though this is a psychological law of man's nature, it is not theoretical. It's factual.

*These vapid phrases are fun!

I know.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't have to study those other theories to share what Lessans observed. That's like saying in order to show you that 2+2=4, I have to know your reasons why you believe it's 2+2=5. I realize that you don't believe his claims are undeniable, which is why you are telling me that I have a lot to learn before I have any credibility. But if he is right, then your reasoning is false.

If he was right, he was right, that is true. But such a simplistic tautology hardly makes me think you or Lessans are offering anything valid when it comes to factual or compelling information about the Universe and the world. My reasoning is based on scientific study and evidence, yours is based on faith in your dad.

Maybe faith is good enough for a credulous person who has no interest in understanding anything, like yourself, but to me it's just some random someone saying a lot of stuff they can't support. Just one of a million other random people saying a bunch of stuff they can't support.

I can dismiss Lessans based on nothing more than this statement of yours and feel good about it.

So you keep on your merry way, but you will continue to be frustrated.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I don't know what my goal is at this point. I know I'm never going through this again. I'm going to create my own website with a FAQ section for people who are seriously interested in the book.

Go spend your time on that then. Remember when I told you pretty much anyone can put up a website and say whatever they want? That applies to you. You can even do it as a blog for free. A domain name is like 10.00 a year if you want to buy one.

So there is nothing preventing you from spending your time on a project that you consider more worthwhile, and less stressful, than arguing here.

[LadyShea]

To say it's an instant transfer of information is misleading. It sounds like this information is traveling (through time and space) faster than the speed of light.

If efferent vision is true, as Lessans detailed it with the instantaneous seeing aspect, then information IS being transferred faster than the speed of light.

What part of "Information from point A is somehow acquired at point B" confuses you?

The ship out at sea signaling SOS with a strong light is imparting information, that information is "We need help". Your seeing the flashing light from shore at some other point in space- instantly with your efferent vision- means you have the information "someone needs help"-faster than you would have had that information if you had to wait for the light to travel that distance.

In other words: you at point B now have information imparted by point A and you got it instantly, without a speed of light delay

So, what are you not understanding? Where's the boggle?

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Here's another study abstract indicating facial recognition in dogs

The study is clearly flawed because dogs can do no such thing. After all, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

The study is clearly flawed because dogs can do no such thing. After all, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Can't argue with that, right from the horse's mouth!

[Stephen Maturin]

An empty can makes the most noise.

[LadyShea]

Yes but he who laughs last laughs best

[Stephen Maturin]

You're embarrassing yourself, LadyShea. You are trying to unring a bell hanging around the neck of a horse that has left the barn and is now aboard a ship that has already sailed.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's right after that one sentence that took us on a wild goose chase regarding the two choices of living out one's life as best one can, or committing suicide.

The two choices are "Living or Dying", Suicide is a red herring to confuse the issue, not a valid choice.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

You're embarrassing yourself, LadyShea. You are trying to unring a bell hanging around the neck of a horse that has left the barn and is now aboard a ship that has already sailed.

It could have been a lot worse, and remember everything happens for a reason. I am sure this cloud has a silver lining.

[Stephen Maturin]

Indeed. That makes sense, seeing as how a rolling stone gathers no moss and all.

[Adam]

I can't believe this thrad is still going strong! Is this officially our longest (mostly) single topic thrad evar?

[LadyShea]

Adam, please provide your commentary in the form of a vapid platitude.

After all, what is wisdom but a collection of platitudes?

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Would you stop it doc. I don't need professional help. I didn't have an unusual attachment; but I did have a loving father/daughter relationship.

I am not floundering, and I'm answering the questions to the best of my ability.

Your need for help is clearly in evidence on this thread, any Psychiatrist or Psychologist would have a field day analysing your posts. I do believe that you had a strong relationship with your father.

That you are answering 'to the best of your ability' indicates that you are indeed, 'Floundering'. That is also evidenced on this thread.

[thedoc]

Some things Daddys can't fix, Even with duct tape.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Adam, please provide your commentary in the form of a vapid platitude.

Ummm...the squeaky thrad gets the most poasts?

[LadyShea]

That has entirely too much meaning. Did L. Ron Hubbard say that in Dianetics?

Anyway, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and every journey begins with the first step, so where do we go from here?

[Adam]

It is what it is, I suppose.

[thedoc]

The way this thread is persisting, I believe the 'Fat Lady' lost her cab fair.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Anyway, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and every journey begins with the first step, so where do we go from here?

"and every journey begins with the first step", unless it's a miss-step.

Every vacation begins with a flat tire.

[thedoc]

The road to the 'Golden Age' is paved with false premises.

[thedoc]

It has also been said that every 'silver lining' (sounds too good to be true), has a big dark cloud with it (realty).