Dear Dear Anartaxius, Somehow we must deal with this “Cognitive Inhibition” problem which so evidently is at the root of so much skepticism around some certain things so good that it obstructs a positive consensus about our history and where we could together go. I do not wish to force my thoughts upon you or anyone else, but I feel forced myself. Little as I know of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, I would fain do my part to correct the tone and the statements of the newspapers and newsgroups, and of our FFL people here generally, respecting his character and actions. It costs us nothing to be just. We can at least express our sympathy with, and admiration of, him and his companions, and that is what I now propose to do. Sincerely, -Buck in the Dome
Science Discovers A Clear and Present Spiritual Danger: Too Damned much “Cognitive Inhibition”. So, the practical take-away from this research is that skeptics here suffer from “Cognitive Inhibition”. Too damned much “Cognitive Inhibition” evidently is a very sad state of diagnosis frequently leading to spiritual depression such like we see expressed so often on FFL. More research is needed on this condition to be able to protect people from the deleterious effects of this dangerous state in their spiritual lives. "A recent issue of Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (via BPS Research Digest) suggests that skeptics possess greater powers of cognitive inhibition. Our brains evidently infer greater meaning from random events in an instinctual way. "Cognitive inhibition, that is, suppressing or overriding spontaneously occurring mental processes, may thus be the mechanism that, when working efficiently, controls our natural intuitions and explains why supernatural interpretations seem so natural for some people and yet others find them quite strange," There are caveats involved. In this case, since creativity also relies on reduced cognitive inhibition (introducing the mind to new ideas), it's possible that believer brain activity was just the creative process in motion. A larger lingering question is why (and how) people can shift from believer to skeptic and back." Turquoiseb posts: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3025750/evidence/the-neuroscience-of-superstition http://www.fastcodesign.com/3025750/evidence/the-neuroscience-of-superstition Anartaxius writes: All I did was cut and paste Yahoo guidelines, as Buck had mentioned them. What does that have to do with what Judy wrote to Buck? I was curious about the Yahoo guidelines because I had never read them until now. As text, the format of the guidelines did not paste in well, but they are still readable. Because Judy seems to know what I was thinking at the time, perhaps, in an independent post (so she does not have to lie as much), she can give more details of my misunderstanding of what she claims is my take on what she wrote to Buck. It seems to me that Buck's interpretation of the Yahoo guidelines is not entirely clear of the mark. My take on Buck's concern is that generally I think he would be over censorious in instituting content and language controls. .
