--- "John H." <bingblat from goaway.com.au> wrote:
> To go from Edelman to leadership consciousness is
> not only a bridge too far
> but has absolutely no logical connections. How
>> "In Search of Excellence" Waterman and Peters,
> classic old text on
> leadership in business.
>> Or "The Noasshole Rule" by some economist at
> harvard. Very interesting.
>> But forget about learning about leadership
> consciousness by reading books
> about consciousness because the latter is befuddled
> and damning. We don't
This is in defence of Terri Egan .... John, I find
your remarks rather dismissive, sarcastic even, and
therefore offensive since I am a member of the mailing
list. The questioner wished, I understand,
to have a discussion on Edelman's model of
consciousness, and of course I realise that you have
no wish to traverse the ground, however, there is no
need to be so patronizing.....
As far as my knowledge of "consciousness theories"
goes, I have some idea of the NC correlates by Crick
and Koch, which I find reasonable enough and no other,
and would like to understand, a little further the
"befuddled" ideas of Edelman, if anyone cares to put
their objective views on it.
>> "Tim Egan" <timegan1 from cox.net> wrote in message
>news:mailman.399.1193686609.23109.neur-sci from net.bio.net...
> > Hello -
> > I am very interested in reading more about your
> model of
> > consciousness. I am on the faculty at Pepperdine
> University in the
> > School of Business. My research interests focus on
> the evolution of
> > leadership consciousness.
> > Warm regards,
> > Terri Egan
> > Associate Professor of Applied Behavioral Science
> > Pepperdine University
> Neur-sci mailing list
>Neur-sci from net.bio.net>http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/neur-sci>
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around