Re: How child abuse and neglect damage the brain

[ I do not only depend on logic (which you now seem to be hung up on),
I
just expect it to be always operational.
I am an empiricist..
There will still be assumptions in there somewhere.]

Idea, hypothesis, evidence, theory, evidence, law, proof, truth.

[ What I *infer* is, presently, the best working hypothesis.
It is for paedophiles! But not necessarily for anyone else.]

It is independent of any singular group..

[ Truth needs no support, once realised.
I was thinking more along the lines of this scenario: you lock two
blokes up in an empty room, and give them one cake between them to
sustain them. The cake contains sufficient nourishment to support only
one life. If they share it, they'll both die in due course. Now on
entering the room the blokes don't know this, and so they agree to
share the cake. Now, do you really think it will necessarily be to the
benefit of both individuals for the truth to be established?]

Why do you think that truth *has* to be beneficial, particularly in
one truth's isolation?

[Only ever for a 'short' time, until society catches up.
Again, that is not necessarily true. Many societies in the past have
collapsed, and the aggregate knowledge of those societies has been
lost. I believe the use of concrete is an example of knowledge that
was discovered and then lost for centuries when Roman society
collapsed.]

....and was 'refound'.

[Schizophrenia does not increase risk of violent
crimehttp://www.physorg.com/news162047519.html
I didn't say schizophrenics tended to be violent. You talked of
'violent schizophrenics' who presumably are, by definition, violent.]

But do not, by *definition* cause, proven serious harm.

[You have no idea, do you know much about her mother?
I don't to be honest. It was an example off the top of my head.
However if you're going to go on and say how poor Kampusch's home life
was, then Priklopil may well have been the soft option. Still, I think
that would say more about Kampusch's parents, than it would about
Priklopil.]

It suggests, simply, what may have been the case.

[ is that people can be made to like anything.
Especially when it is harmless, fun and exciting
Evidently some children do enjoy the process. As I've said, you can
get children to like virtually anything.]

You have not tried to get many minors to do something they do not want
to, have you? never mind if they like it or not.

[> That is how language works. i.e an object which is animated and is
an
animal and is .... etc etc is Napoleon Bonaparte.
I haven't actually got enough time to study that link. However we're
talking about what language is, not how children learn it. And indeed
I may well disagree with the approach taken.]

The figure is small and clear. Minors and adults learn words and
meaning, because of what language is.

However, if you do not have time for evidence .......

[ I have no idea why you think your last comment is an issue, as we
talking about human neuroscience, here, which guides (controls?) all
our behaviour.
I'm glad to see there's some common ground. To be honest that's why I
like talking to you - even if I do patently disagree on certain
issues. The bottom line is that you've just got to be careful not to
become reductionist about the matter. Humans are systems, but not
closed systems.]

The laws of physics are what they are.

[Again, a straw man (and a rubbish one ;) ), as I am not a twin of
Napoleon Bonaparte.
Still, the point I'm making is that if you define Napoleon as as
individual possessing a certain DNA profile, then presumably you are
not Napoleon. But if people define Napoleon some other way, then that
definition could quite possibly encompass you as well as the 'real'
Napoleon.]

No, as soon as the DNA says not, nothing else helps you. Of course, I
could have chosen many criteria (e.g. birth and death date, height
etc) and then 'triangulate' them.

[No I cannot see at all, and nor should you. Logic is not everything.
I never said logic was everything. I'm saying language does not have
an explicit logical definition, and it is clear there is not a 100%
correlation in meaning between two speakers of the same language.]

Yes there is, for nearly every word, or no verbal communication would
be possible.

May I be rude and ask how old you are and some idea of your work/study
background?

WM
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How child abuse and neglect damage the brain
    ... There is only acceptable and unacceptable, truth and falsehood. ... saying that the status quo always remains and must always be accepted. ... If enough people described you as Napoleon Bonaparte, ... It's untenable to say that language has any objective definition. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: How child abuse and neglect damage the brain
    ... proof) that I approach the truth, ... I regularly find language is ... I am Napoleon, ... If enough people described you as Napoleon Bonaparte, ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: JEINT EVERYTHING
    ... >>> himself in a fashion that we as a society should not condone. ... I was using Chaucer as an example of how English has evolved over ... >> Your country has nothing to do with language and how it evolves. ... >> liberal agenda has nothing to do with language. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: OT: Drivers licenses for illegals - just to bizarre
    ... thing as "human society" as some sort of wholistic blob. ... We can reason before we develop language; and other animals also demonstrate behaviors consistent with reasoning to solve novel problems. ... The value of cooperation is such that people working together will virtually always progress further and faster than will the dogged individualists ... According to the lockean homestead principle, ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: How child abuse and neglect damage the brain
    ... You can have truth, ... Only ever for a 'short' time, until society catches up. ... The point I'm making is that a language is defined however the ... Identical twins do not have identical DNA, ...
    (uk.legal)
Loading