Roger Sperry's Nobel Prize (was "impact of telepathy")

John M Price PhD jmprice at
Sat Feb 10 15:58:59 EST 2001

In sci.psychology.theory article <96297b$5ft$1 at> EL <hemetis at> wrote:
: In article <3a8489ad_2 at>,
:  "John M Price PhD" jmprice at wrote:

:> :> --
:> :> John M. Price, PhD
:> :> Life: Chemistry, but with feeling!
:> : --
:> : [EL]
:> : Hah. :)
:> : What "branch" of chemistry did you say that you earned that Ph.D.
: in?
:> Psychology, UCDavis, 1994.

: [EL]
: So what was that "Chemistry, but with feeling!", a disguise? ;)

Interesting idea, but know.  My program was in physiological psychology
(comparative/physiological precisely).  I thought it a rather dense
digestion of information.  

Still, just for fun, telnet to melvyl and look up John Michael Price as an
author.  ( - the library system at UC)

: Philosophy doctorates in psychology are welcome when they are what they
: are, not when they pretend what they are not.

This is an open group (spt), so all are welcome.  

:> : Embarrassment, or was it deep embarrassment?
:> : Pay attention to the meanings of the words sir.
:> : Scientists do work on frogs and mice to conclude for humans before
:> : attempting to verify.
:> : You are talking about a Nobel Laureate here not one of your
: students.
:> So, you have an authoritarian complex, I see.

: [EL]
: Not even a flying monkey's fart. As I do question some of Einstein's
: work such as the time and twin paradox.
: Yet, we should realize that Nobel Laureates are normal people who have
: worked much more than average people and we should not underestimate
: their work, but then you seem to have changed your stance after the
: embarrassment so it is ok. :)

No, I've not changed my stance at all.  I was simply incorrect about the
Nobel.  There was indeed a question on what it was for at the initial
announcement.  I have simply misremembered what the thing actually said.

:> Actually, I read his work. It is excellent.

: [EL]
: If you have read his work and think that it is excellent, why did you
: not follow up on his Nobel prize to see the title of his work before
: your hasty post, which embarrassed you so much?

I trusted my memory?  It wasn't an embarrassment.  

: Is there any possibility that the position is switched here?
: Or am I absolutely correct on following the events and who said what?

As I said, I was in error.  Your point?

: So what does the psychology professor say?

Telepathy is flat out bunk, but the Bem ond Honorton (sp?) paper is
intriguing.  I think that what should actually be done is apply Signal
Detection Theory to the subject, and see what arises from that.  Present
research is based on old style psychophysics, and has the errors intrinsic
to that process.  We are all human, after all, and share a common
environment.  That, in and of itself, will bring in enough noise in the
receiver that it can possibly bring the results above chance.  The SDT
procedures will help to take that into account.

John M. Price, PhD                                     jmprice at
Life: Chemistry, but with feeling!      |      PGP Key on request or FTP!
  Email responses to my Usenet articles will be posted at my discretion. 
Comoderator: sci.psychology.psychotherapy.moderated          Atheist# 683

Even a man who is pure in heart
   and says his prayers by night
May become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms
   and the autumn moon is bright

     -  if you don't know the source, you've led a deprived life

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list