Re: Neural representation of concepts

The point is, you simpleton, that the optimism of "thinkers" like you is way
out of proportion to our actual ability to control behavior by
neurobiological manipulation, or even way out of proportion to our ability
to interpret behavior in real physiological terms (rather than the obviously
metaphorical language of cognitive "science"), or our ability to model
behavior in the sense of AI.

It is not a matter of "neurobiology being worthless" it is a matter of
facing the conceptual muddle that comprises cognitive "science," recognizing
its already pervasive influence on what behavioral neurobiologists say, and
realizing that no science can be healthy with such blatant disregard for
whether or not its concepts are anything but metaphor. It is about making
behavioral neuroscience more effective.

"OmegaZero2003" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Yes  you are right; neurobiology has gotten nowhere in the last 100 years.
>
> Please increase the dosage of anti-delusional drugs you are taking; the
> current amount is not working.
>
> BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
>
>
> "Glen M. Sizemore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Now, if only they would see the foolishness of talking about
> > "representations" and "processing" and see that what is going on is
> operant
> > conditioning, and what they are getting at is the physiology of stimulus
> > control, behavioral neurobiology might actually get somewhere.
> >
> > "OmegaZero2003" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
>
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nrn/journal/v4/n12/full/nrn1280_fs.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>