Mr. Knight,
I've read these messages being cross-posted into bionet.neuroscience
only sporadically, noting, when I did, that your posts are
consistently anti-this and anti-that.
Curious with respect to such, tonight, I ordered the posts by author
and found that you've cross-posted 67, presumably [I've read only
those to which I've responded], anti-this and anti-that, messages
into bionet.neuroscience, so it's seems that there's something
in-there that needs to be addressed.
What got my attention, recently, was your attack on Marie Curie. What
got my attention a while back was your attack on Jews.
And you ratcheted-up your attack on Marie Curie into another
generalized attack upon Women.
When you do such, Mr. Knight, you denigrate everyone, because we've
all got Mothers, through whom we're here to discuss - through whom
we're here to do anything that we do.
Forgive me, please, but such is intolerable - to 'tolerate' such is
to allow your 'bullying' 'language' to plant the seeds of Hatred from
which dynamics that Ravage Humanity grow.
So I'll state my disagreement, as plainly as I can.
I've done work in a number of Siences. I've given my Life to doing
this work, and I've had some success, but I've not been able to get
any of my work published.
As you can imagine, working hard, only to be 'censored', causes one
to 'scratch-his-head', a bit, and I've done a lot of that with
specific respect to the very matters you've anti-ed-this and
anti-ed-that about.
With respect to doing work in Science, it's just not as you say, and
what you say has stated the case for Women more-eloquently than
anything else that I've ever experienced.
In other words, you've been 'shooting-yourself-in-the-foot', because
I understand, well, the stuff that coerses folks with respect to
doing 'science', and it's verifiably not the stuff that you've
gone-on about - some supposed 'inferioity'. That's just not it.
I've studied this stuff, you see, because it's been the case that
I've done significant work in a number of Sciences, but I've not been
able to get anything published, or to even earn my living through the
Science I do.
What it comes down to is that 'science' is like a 'club', the 'rules'
of which stretch all the way back to Midieval 'times'.
The thing is that these ancient 'rules', through their simple
repetition, gained strong behavioral inertia.
In the work I've done I've explained how and why such behavioral
inertia develops within nervous systems, and how it negatively
impacts Humanity's going-forward.
It's the stuff of "Prejudice".
It derives in the way evolutionary dynamics 'engineered' our nervous
systems so that they'd be able to solve the problem of how to
collectively-activate the muscles of our bodies so that our bodies
will 'move away from' environmental sources of noxious ['pain']
stimulation.
The problem so solved - of 'avoiding-pain' - is of infinitely-large
scope because environmental sources of noxious stimulation can come
from any direction in the environment, and this infinity is
compounded in instances of 'attack-behavior' because an attacking
'animal' can, itself, vary its body's conformation infinitely [within
the ranges of motions of its joints].
So, the problem is Hard-to-solve.
But it turns out that the solution to this problem, having
infinitely-large-scope, that the evolutionary-'engineer' worked-out,
enables our nervous systems to resolve it in milli-second
'time'-frame.
It's just an awesomely-powerful information-processing capability.
What the evolutionary-'engineer' did was to physically structure our
nervous systems so that, when 'painful' stimuli are encountered our
nervous systems 'strive' to achieve one 'goal'. If you imagine it in
3-D, 'pain' stimulation comes into the nervous system like a little
'mountain' of neural activation, the topography of which is mapped to
the body-environment interface [the skin], and what the nervous
system does is, while maintaining topological-mapping to the
body-environment interface, 'transform' the little 'mountain' of
activation into a little 'valley' of activation, and project this
transformed activation back to the musculature.
Because this topological-inversion takes the 'point' of
greatest-activation, and transforms it into the 'point' of least
activation, and so forth, with respect to the rest of the little
'mountain' of activation, all while maintaining mapping with respect
to the body-environment interface, the result is that our bodies
tend, strongly, to 'move away from' environmental sources of noxious
stimulation. Get it? The muscles that were most-activated while
'moving toward' what turned out to be noxious environmental stuff,
become the least-activated muscles, etc., so the body 'moves away
from' the environmental source of noxious stimulation.
It's an exceedingly-beautiful solution to a problem having
infinitely-large scope. It's overall simplicity is what enables our
nervous systems to solve the problem of 'pain'-avoidance in
milli-second 'time'-frame.
Evolutionary dynamics 'decided' that this problem-resolution was so
important to our survival that they carried it forward, even into the
'highest-levels' of nervous system function - all the way up into
'cognition' and 'volition', like we all express in our posts in this
or that newsgroup.
In doing so, however, evolutionary dynamics built a tragic-flaw into
our nervous systems.
You see, at the 'higher-levels' of our nervous systems' functioning
[cognition and volition]. the 'mechanism' that transforms the little
'mountains' of activation into little 'valleys' of activation becomes
subject to 'learning', and, since our nervous systems do only the one
'blindly'-automated thing, over the long-term, 'learning', itself,
occurs as a function of the 'mountain'-to-'valley' transformation
dynamics.
What this means is that, if person A experiences
relatively-exclusively in enviroment A, and person B experiences
relatively-exclusively in enviroment B, the neural modifications that
encode 'learning' within each of their nervous systems will develop m
utually-exclusive 'valley'-of-neural-activation stuff.
Now, it person A encounters any environment that is not environment
A, his nervous system will tend to go into a 'state-of-panic', and,
more importantly, if person A and person B encounter each other, both
of their nervous systems will tend to go into a 'state-of-panic'.
Remember, from above, how the 'rules' of 'science' [and of anything
else] develop over the course of inter-generationally-handed-down
experience? Well, the fact that it's so results in folks who
experience this or that relatively exclusicely being just like our
person A and our person B.
You are 'person A', and it seems that, to you, almost everyone else
is 'person B'.
What it comes down to, Mr. Knight, is that the sum of your
experiences is relatively-mutually-exclusive with, it seems, almost
everyone else.
What your nervous system is 'sensing' comes, not from direct
knowledge with respect to this or that, but from the fact that your
experience is relatively-mutually-exclusice with respect to the
experience of, it seems, just about everyone else.
Don't 'panic' - there's no 'need' to.
Just understand that =anyone's= relatively-mutually-exclusive
experience tends to result in the 'unfolding' of the neural dynamics
that occur within their nervous system[s] in a way that yields
'moving away from' behaviors.
Hence, the 'anti-' stuff that you express in your posts.
I'm 'speaking' from the understanding that I've developed while doing
significant work in Science, but being 'unable' to get any of my work
published in any 'normal' way.
You see, all your arguments against Ms. Curie apply directly to me.
The thing is, I'm a man.
And I've studied the dynamics, inherent, and know, with certainty,
that it doesn't have anything to do with 'maleness' or 'femaleness',
but derives in the fact that the work I saw needing-doing ran
contrary to the 'rules' of the 'club' of 'science'. It's a matter of
my experience being relatively-mutually-exclusive with those
long-standing, intergenerationally-handed-down 'rules'.
My being an 'outcast' stems from the fact that I 'broke-the-rules'
with respect to what was considered to constitute the 'science',
itself.
I'm on the low-'side' of the economic spectrum, so I couldn't afford
a 'fancy' educational experience - couldn't 'pay the dues' to gain
membership in the 'club'.
But I flat-out Loved Science, so I did what I could with what I had
at hand, which, thanks to my Mother and Father, was mostly just a
willingness to work.
I studied in the library, and because I studied mostly in solitde,
even though I studied the experimental results that were produced by
the members of the 'club', my experience, while studying, became
relatively-mutually-exclusive - I gradually became a 'person A' in a
scientific-world of 'persons B'.
But there was worth in-it, because, in my solitary approach, I
experienced what was in the experimental results in a way that
violated the 'rules' of 'science'.
And it turned out that doing so made all the difference because, free
of the 'rules', I was able to 'travel' a 'path' that was 'outlawed'
by the 'rules' of 'science'.
The 'point' of this discussion is that, although I am a man, my
experience is, albeit, for a gender-independent reason, nevertheless,
analogous to that of women with respect to the doing of Science.
Way back in Midieval 'times', when the 'rules' of 'science'
carried-over from the general 'rules' of labor, women were 'banned'
from doing 'science'.
Those 'rules' still exist, powerfully.
I came up against their non-gender-relevant 'constraints' because I
did not do Science in the way that 'science is supposed to be done'.
The result, in my experience, is analogous to that which you,
falsely, attribute to "women".
The 'villain' is Ignorance, Mr. Knight - Ignorance that derives in
the way our nervous systems 'blindly' and automatically 'glom-onto'
that which, through experience, becomes merely-familiar.
The stuff of such 'villainy' can be overcome 'merely' through the
widening of experiential-scope.
The single quotes are around "'merely'", in the last sentence,
because, in practice, it's often difficult to overcome 'prejudice'
because there are all the intergenerationally-handed-down 'rules',
which have such great behavioral inertia.
But all the stuff with respect to which you're anti-this and
anti-that is 'just' the stuff of Human Beings striving to find their
ways through all the 'rules' that are held-over since ancient
'times' - the intergenerationally-handed-down stuff that, rather than
doing anything 'good' for Humanity, greatly impeads Humanity's
progress.
Think about it. Each Human Being 'feels' all of the same 'passions'
that any other Human Being 'feels', only with respect to their
individually-unique experience.
So, when any of us 'denies' anyone else opportunity to seek to follow
her/his 'passion', it's the same as 'denying' the validity of our own
'passion'.
Don't mis-take this as a 'prescription for anarchy'.
How can anyone, who understands all of this, do anything that'll not
assist others in ways that foster the well-being of all.
Remember, when one 'denies' anyone else opportunity to seek to follow
her/his 'passion', it's the same as 'denying' the validity one's own
'passion'.
Think about it, and you'll see the Golden Rule in-there.
Why have I taken the 'time' to write this reply?
It's just struck me that what a 'loss' it is to all of us that your
obviously-substantial 'passion' is being, largely, diverted into
anti-this and anti-that stuff, all 'anti-' with respect to others
just wanting to Live.
So I thought reaching-out to you would be worth the 'time'.
How worthwhile it'd be if 'passion' such as yours were directed in
ways that serve and assist folks, instead of 'denying' folks'
striving.
You know... there're folks, all over the place, who are victimized by
old, long-familiar, intergenerationally-handed-down stuff.
Take my case, for instance.
It's not the folks in-'science' that're the 'problem'.
It's that folks in-'science' were victimized by a lot of old,
long-familiar, intergenerationally-handed-down stuff.
=Big-Difference=.
And it's important to get, and keep, such straight in one's mind.
Cheers, Mr. Knight
k. p. collins
