hopefully there wasn't anything important in there - cuz i read the 1st 2 paragraphs and then skimmed. not b/c i don't think you are read-worthy, rather i limit myself to 3mins tops on LJ. buaaa haa haa haa. also, invisible jello wld be kickass.
Re: This one.thatmikeguyMarch 4 2007, 21:35:50 UTC
That is an awesome gif... it should have been in that mirror-neuron story :)
I agree completely with the idea that the shared experience of our senses is pivotal to our communication, and that our senses developed based on our environment and are set up to provide the best info possible about that environment... however that is all at a higher level of detail than I'm questioning. I'm saying there may be no we, or no earth, or no universe... we rely on our 'senses' to establish that underpinning. We have no proof of the senses, and no real way to prove it since that is our only way for observing anything 'external' to us.
I'm just saying it could all be a big dream, which is why it's a useless entry ;)
Although I think it is important to keep in mind that we are actually taking those things for granted... just so nobody gets on their high-horse and says that they have the answers :)
It's only theory (like everything else we perceive), but doctors do believe babies do hear stuff in utero. They say that they will become familiar with the voices that surround them most often. And depending on what you believe in, some folks will say that when babies are in utero they still have memories from past lives and perhaps that's what they dream about. Also, perhaps they are sheming and dreaming about what their lives will be about. Amy says that if you give a baby a certain flower essence when he/she is first born, it will help them remember his/her life's purpose. So maybe they are dreaming about their life purpose.
And man. . . . these last few posts have been great. It's almost like we are at the Wag having coffee and you won't stop talking. ;-p Love you.
I'm mouth st. helens, remember... spewing from my ash-hole :) (maybe I never told you that nick-name). Ahh the wag... that was fun.
Yeah, I think if we knew what was going on in babies noggins we would have a much firmer grasp on TONS of things. Goes a lot to the question of how much of our knowledge/personality is genetically encoded (if you're explaining those things scientifically)... I'll probably end up babbling about that too :)
Comments 10
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
( ... )
Reply
I agree completely with the idea that the shared experience of our senses is pivotal to our communication, and that our senses developed based on our environment and are set up to provide the best info possible about that environment... however that is all at a higher level of detail than I'm questioning. I'm saying there may be no we, or no earth, or no universe... we rely on our 'senses' to establish that underpinning. We have no proof of the senses, and no real way to prove it since that is our only way for observing anything 'external' to us.
I'm just saying it could all be a big dream, which is why it's a useless entry ;)
Although I think it is important to keep in mind that we are actually taking those things for granted... just so nobody gets on their high-horse and says that they have the answers :)
Reply
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/magazine/04evolution.t.html?ref=magazine
Reply
Reply
And man. . . . these last few posts have been great. It's almost like we are at the Wag having coffee and you won't stop talking. ;-p Love you.
Reply
Yeah, I think if we knew what was going on in babies noggins we would have a much firmer grasp on TONS of things. Goes a lot to the question of how much of our knowledge/personality is genetically encoded (if you're explaining those things scientifically)... I'll probably end up babbling about that too :)
Reply
Leave a comment