On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 10:43:39 -0600, James Michael Howard
<jmhoward at arkansas.net> wrote:
>Empathy may be the formation of hypotheses in response to emotional stimuli that
>manifest themselves in structures connected with emotion. Hypotheses of this
>type may be a primitive ability which may increase group cohesiveness.
>Hypotheses of this type may be the bases of religion as opposed to hypotheses
>generated by the advanced forebrain. These two types of ability to form
>hypotheses may separate religion (emotion) from science.
>>James Michael Howard
Now that is sufficiently vague while at the same time being all
I doubt those four sentences describe anything significant.
Particularly since operational definitions of your terms are missing.
Is "Empathy the formation of hypotheses in response to emotional
stimuli" OR is Empathy simply THE EMOTIONAL RESPONSE to EXTERNAL
I go with the latter. Since I don't know what "emotional stimuli" are
I'd prefer to look at "stimuli" as simply information that can be
Ah, to quibble philosphic... I miss that.