Ok. it seems to REALLY the old debate between “tough love” vs “prisons getting cable tv”, which I remember a lot of in the 1990s. I found this from 2000 and it seems to reflect the times – back then, “get tough on crime” was very popular in the media – Dr. Phil and stuff – even if people were really more willing to accept rehabilitative measures as well. —– https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/652198 “Get tough” control policies in the United States are often portrayed as the reflection of the public’s will: Americans are punitive and want offenders locked up. Research from the past decade both reinforces and challenges this assessment. The public clearly accepts, if not prefers, a range of punitive policies (e. g., capital punishment, three-strikes-and-you’re-out laws, imprisonment). But support for get-tough policies is “mushy.” Thus citizens may be willing to substitute a sentence of life imprisonment without parole for the death penalty. Especially when nonviolent offenders are involved, there is substantial support for intermediate sanctions and for restorative justice. Despite three decades of criticism, rehabilitation-particularly for the young-remains an integral part of Americans’ correctional philosophy. There is also widespread support for early intervention programs. In the end, the public shows a tendency to be punitive and progressive, wishing the correctional system to achieve the diverse missions of doing justice, protecting public safety, and reforming the wayward.”

Ok. it seems to
[read full article]
 

I only understand some things from Heidegger but one is the idea that the tools become part of us. And when they did brain scans of humans using tools, our mental body shape extends out to include the tools we’re using, whether a hammer or the entirety of the car while we’re using them.

I only understand some
[read full article]
 

I snipped it from a longer text showing a dozen or so examples of Africans arriving in the South America long before Columbus. It has the name of the polish professor that found the skeletons shown. You have Google or Bing or whatever’s your thing. If interested you’d search. If you want to debate as if the only universe is you and I and whatever words we pick, then you’re interested in debate, not research.

 I snipped it from
[read full article]
 

Oh I’m sure I’ve read this before – will check. I don’t remember finding much research in this area so it’s likely this was ‘it’. The cognitive and neural correlates of tactile memory. Gallace, A., & Spence, C. (2009). The cognitive and neural correlates of tactile memory. Psychological Bulletin, 135(3), 380–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015325 Tactile memory systems are involved in the storage and retrieval of information about stimuli that impinge on the body surface and objects that people explore haptically. Here, the authors review the behavioral, neuropsychological, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging research on tactile memory. This body of research reveals that tactile memory can be subdivided into a number of functionally distinct neurocognitive subsystems, just as is the case with auditory and visual memory. Some of these subsystems are peripheral and short lasting and others are more central and long lasting. The authors highlight evidence showing that the representation of tactile information interacts with information about other sensory attributes (e.g., visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic) of objects/events that people perceive. This fact suggests that at least part of the neural network involved in the memory for touch might be shared among different sensory modalities. In particular, multisensory/amodal information-processing networks seem to play a leading role in the storage of tactile information in the brain. (APA PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fa0015325

Oh I’m sure I’ve
[read full article]
 

I _do_ JUMP to Conclusions, particularly a 77 page paper. I’ll give the name of it at the end: Conclusions All of the theories we have considered contain some useful features that need to be included in a definitive theory of life (Fig. 49), but all lack some that are important. In particular, none of them incorporate any mechanism of regulation, or any other mechanism to prevent a self-organizing system from growing until it forms a tar (Section 3.1.8). In extreme cases a real living organism may starve to death, or die for some other reason, but, apart from a cancer, which is not a self-organized system, it never forms a tar or otherwise disorganized state. We have not provided all the answers in this review, but we hope that we have pointed to the direction that future research needs to take in the hope of arriving at a definitive theory of life. There are various courses that future research may take: 1. Each individual researcher may a choose a preferred theory from the current ones and try to extend it. That is essentially what has happened until now, and we do not believe that it is the best way forward. 2. One may try to incorporate all the points in Fig. 49 into a single theory, after first identifying and eliminating any logical inconsistencies. The main points that we see are the following: (a) Construction of a membrane needs to be described explicitly, not just left for future development. (b) Thermodynamic requirements need to be satisfied explicitly. For a system at the origin of life it may be sufficient to suppose a supply of energy-rich nutrients, but a more long-term system certainly needs to harness gradients across boundaries. (c) It is not enough to have a cycle labelled “information cycle”: there must be a clear mechanism for collecting, storing and using the information. (d) Any living system must be closed to efficient causation: the catalysts (apart from metal ions) must be produced by the organism in such a way that infinite regress is avoided. (e) There must be regulation of the metabolism, so that organisms cannot grow indefinitely, and metabolites are produced only as needed. 3. One should identify if there are other essential characteristics not mentioned in Fig. 49 that need to be incorporated. We are not aware of essential characteristics apart from metabolic regulation that are missing from all of the current theories. 4. The really adventurous could start with a completely clean plate and develop a new theory that is not derived from any of the existing ones. Contrasting theories of life: Historical context, current theories. In search of an ideal theory Athel Cornish-Bowden María Luz Cárdenas 2019

I _do_ JUMP to
[read full article]