Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA23080 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Fri, 30 Nov 2001 04:10:00 GMT X-Originating-IP: [220.127.116.11] From: "Scott Chase" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Study shows brain can learn without really trying Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:05:02 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F53kmMWU3txlIAPiDF800014f5f@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov 2001 04:05:03.0308 (UTC) FILETIME=[300740C0:01C17954] Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>From: "Dace" <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: Study shows brain can learn without really trying
>Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:34:11 -0800
> > <The 20th century seems to have passed you right by.
> > > The important distinction is that consciousness is something that
> > > exclusively to the individual mind, while the unconscious is
> > > embracing all of us. It's the set of instincts according to which
> > > human mind operates. Occupying a kind of twilight zone is the
> > > subconscious
> > > mind, which is individual despite being unconscious.>
> > >
> > I don't know which 20th Century you lived in. I assume you're
> > referring to the idea here of the collective unconscious? Not a very
> > proposition outside of pro-Jungian psychoanalytical circles.
>I'll admit my take is Jungian, but the reality of the unconscious,
>collective or individual, is part and parcel of 20th century enlightenment,
>every bit as fundamental as E=mc'd.
> > Breathing is unconscious behaviour- our brain is regulating it
> > making sure we do it, but we are not conscious of that process. But it
> > an individual thing. I do not breath because my species tells me to
>Yes, you do. Breathing is universal to the species. It's a part of us
>follows from our species-identity as opposed to our individuality. Whether
>the binding agent is morphic or genetic, we are defined collectively.
>The funny thing is that the subject heading of this thread stems from an
>article discussing the importance of the unconscious in learning.
Is UNconscious any better a privative term than INvertebrate, which vaguely
refers to that which is *not* a vertebrate? At least with the latter we
actually know what a backbone is, where...ummm...what is consciousness to
contrast it with the "un"-conscious?
Aren't both catch-all terms? Are you stuck in the 19th century?
Did Jung get Nietzsche (coiner of *das Es*...appropriated by Freud) correct
in his _Zarathustra_ lectures? How much of psychoanalytical thought is
indebted to Nietzsche (and Schopenhauer, von Hartmann, and Carus for that
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
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 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 04:16:08 GMT