Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA13542 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:36:55 +0100 Message-ID: <009d01c1e3ca$bef96980$5ca9eb3e@default> From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be> To: <email@example.com> References: <20020409125003.131E21FD62@camail.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1011 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 17:40:05 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Wade T.Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On 04/09/02 06:54, Vincent Campbell said this-
> >generally intepretations of our perceptions are biased.
> Yup. _All_ interpretations are biased. The self is a bias.
> >how major league batters appear to have
> >more time to spot the spin and direction of the ball than normal people
> This is an excellent example of trained perception, and yes, it is
> perception, learned and improved through practice. It's not that the
> experienced batter 'sees' the ball any better, granting equal acuity of
> vision, but that he can read the early indications of speed and motion
> from the pitcher. The ball is, after all, coming almost directly at him,
> and foreshortening perspective gives him a pretty good look at it. The
> alert batter will be in a late stage of preparation to hit the ball well
> before the ball leaves the pitcher's hand. This would be true in cricket,
> as well, I'm sure, although, because the cricket ball will bounce off the
> ground, there is less certainty about its trajectory.
Hi Wade, Vincent,
I don 't know ! This contradicts the findings of Benjamin Libet.
It takes about 500 milliseconds before a person feels that someone puts a
needle in his finger. Half a second is a very long time in the world of the
brain, though, where in less than 2 milliseconds an action- potential can
A topclass tennisplayer has a service which give the ball a velocity of
about 200 km/ h, his opponent has only 400 milliseconds to hit the ball
back. The decision how to hit the ball back has to be made unconsciously.
How strange it may sound , the player isn 't aware of the fact any ball has
been delivered to him at the same moment he already hit it back.
" The decision to hit back is pure and simple instinct. You don 't decide
where you are going at the moment you will strike the ball. It is just a
question to decide where you gonna hit him. And you don 't have any
clue when you gonna hit the ball unless he is very close to you.
(Vaughan, a topclass player).
Although, such a reaction is more than a simple reflex, strategic thinking
is involved. To strike back a tennisball is a complex proces and is comple-
tely due to unconsciously- processes.
( Susan Greenfield)
What in a sense, brings me back to what Wade wrote in an earlier post,
if what is observed is being stained by and with preconceptions is faulty
in what way can we than describe, if that is than ever possible, a proper
observation at all !? Even the fact that those theories have been tested
over many generations by sort of conjecture/ refutation are in the end and
in a sense all wrong anyway, no !?
So, how can we be sure !?
> One study of Ted Williams (purportedly the finest batter to trod the
> diamond) indicated that he could maintain perceptual observation of the
> pitch well past the first quarter of its progress. But, practice makes
> perfect, and he was a perfectionist.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 14 2002 - 16:47:59 BST