IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Thinking without language?

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Tue Nov 23 11:03:22 EST 1999

kenneth Collins wrote:

> dag.stenberg at helsinki.nospam.fi wrote:


take a rose bush, and 'plant' it where there's no light. despite the good DNA of the rose
bush, not only will one get no roses, one will lose the rose bush, all it's could-be-color,
all it's could-be-fragrence, all the could-be-Joyous givings of roses... 'course, one
dispenses with all the could-be-thorns, "two".

despite what's in the rose bush's good DNA.

what's that 'you' say, this all seems like nothing more than common sense"?

yeah, but when one only looks-and-sees, one sees that, as Einstein said, "Common sense is not
so common." what one sees, rather, is folks who've forsaken "Thought" in favor of 'blind'
automation that derives solely within their own experience, and such, compounded, because
folks sharing relatively-similar experience ban-together to together-ban that which is
merely-relatively-unfamiliar within their relatively-shared experience.

such is particulary Sorrowful when the experiential "worlds" involved derive in "science".

this abandoning, and forced banning, of what should be plain-as-day "common sense", is the
work of the "Beast", Abstract Ignorance, the absence of understanding of the 'blind'
automation of information-processing, via 'blindly' automated TD E/I-minimization, within
nervous systems which, nevertheless, process-information, 'blinely' and automatically, via
'blind', automated TD E/I-minimization.

the "Beast" Ravages and Slaughters, be-cause of folks having 'chosen' not-to-See.

and 'Common Sense' "goes-elsewhere", because it exists only where Truth is 'moved toward'.

look-deeper, any "you'll" see it's all 'just' the one-way flow of energy from order to
disorder that is what's described by 2nd Thermo (wdb2t)... only, when the "Beast", Abstract
Ignorance, Dictates things, to the degree of such, everything's Inverted with respect to
what's innate within us.

we can do so much better... we =can= See.

ken (K. P. Collins)

> via learning, born of experience, behavior selects environmental stuff that gets right
> down into the realm of DNA's energy-transformations.
> for instance, when one chooses to marry, one's choice of spouse 'selects' the degrees to
> which various 'traits', encoded in the DNA will be manifested. analogous things occur
> with respect to 'ordinary' choices with respect to the environment in-general... choosing
> to live near a toxic-waste dump is likely to have deep, and intergenerational,
> consequences with respect to DNA's energy-transformation stuff.
> then there's stuff such as the choice of schools that one's Children will attend... such
> can, and does, 'select' traits within the DNA. (folks who doubt need only compare
> statistics with respect to families that've experienced tragedy which 'renders useless'
> formerly-affluent lifestyles; all of this stuff is discussed further in AoK, in
> particular, Ap4 ("inversion"), and Ap8.)
> in this way, there's nothing that's 'outside the scope' of our nervous systems'
> dynamicism.
> it's subtle, but it matters immensely in these days when, all around, Chemistry is being
> so-greatly pressed into action, and in which folks are so highly-mobile, in which, at
> least here in the U. S. A., there's such enormous disparity among schools to which
> Children have access.
> this stuff, at first, seems a bit "Lamarkian", but that's not it. it's 'just' that life
> choices affect the efficacies inherent in the DNA (trust me, i've reason to comprehend
> such, first-hand, because it's been my lot to have to 'make-do' with what was available
> to me, which was pretty-much just left-over scraps. i'm not 'complaining'... just
> followed what i'd learned at my Father's knee in his cellar workshops. he could take
> scrap wood, salvaged just before being dumped, and make just about anything (out of
> mostly nothing). but the living hand-to-mouth 'selects' for 'coarseness', and although
> i've advanced Science, most folks only 'see', and respond to the 'coarseness' that my
> experience has 'selected'.
> the seeming 'Lamarkian' stuff comes into play, intergenerationally, because that which
> Parents choose determines, to large degree, what their Children will experience, which
> 'selects' the range in which they can experience, which determines what they'll be able
> to enable their own Children to experience... and all the while, each behaviroal decision
> that's made, further 'selects' the traits that'll gain sway in Life, down through
> generations.
> the DNA doesn't just 'sit-there', 'orchestrating' everything. it responds to
> experientially-derived 'inputs'.
> if it's still too-'subtle', choose an extreme example... say one chooses to go to
> Antarctica and live in an igloo. right there, one has determined a lot of stuff. not many
> women will want to accompany one, for instance, and that affects reproductive outcomes.
> the harsh climate, might affect life span, and will affect nutrient intake, which
> translates directly into limitations upon the energy-transformation stuff of the DNA.
> and, surely, the knowledge one accumulates, and passes on to one's Children, will be
> vastly-different from that which one would've acquired had one chosen to live, say, in
> Boston, MA, and so forth, through the Children, to their Children.
> the DNA and life's choices, are 'partners'.
> everything's dynamic.
> that's why Choice, especially with respect to the establishment of the basis for Choice
> (i.e. re. the schools, and learning opportunities we provide the Children) is such
> important stuff. and why Choice, itself must be 'protected'... given 'safe-haven' in
> which there exists room-to-grow.
> experience alters outcome, despite genetic predisposition.
> Choose Well.
> ken (K. P. Collins)

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net