So, will anyone comment with respect to the absence of theorization
Whay doesn't Neuroscience train its Students to see stuff like the
least potential energy dynamic that underpins an adopted Infant's
acquireing its adoptive culture, through experience?
So familiar that it's been 'invisible', eh?
Then, now that Neuroscience knows that it must See such
'invisibly'-familiar stuff, and since NDT shows how to do such, will
folks in Neuroscience remain 'silent' with respect to NTD?
I'm not to 'embarass' folks.
I'm not seeking some 'personal triumph'.
It's =just= that this Science has been done, what's reified in it can
make a huge difference, for the better, within Human interactive
dynamics, yet it's not been adequately communicated.
I'm just trying not to Fail my Obligation to Science.
Is there no way, through means available to folks who meet in
bionet.neuroscience, to bring NDT's understanding forward?
Is there no way to expand Neuroscience's Theorization capabilities as
NDT shows is possible and necessary?
"P. S. ..."