"Peter F" <fell_spamtrap_in at ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:OcF6a.174$Rc.6823 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
| "Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net_NOSPAM> wrote in
| > I agree, but see the "automation" occurring as a function of
| > defficiencies,
|| The way I understand "learning deficiencies", and perceive the
| context in
| which you just used this expression, the only _normal_ learning
| defficiencies of relevance here would be "deficiencies" in the
| 'less-than-ideal' brain functional responses and mental/behavioural
| (in either case characterizable as "AEVASIVE"), and more or less
| outcomes as far as our future evolutionary success (or failure)
What I said was that I "see the "automation" occurring as a function
of learning defficiencies, That is, there's 'blind'-automation
in-there, but it can be transcended ['switched-off'] via experience
that enables folks to learn about how nervous systems process
The "learning deficiencies" occur as a function of differential
experience, and only have consequential existence in terms of the TD
E/I that they induce within interacting nervous systems.
I wasn't implying that this or that nervous system is 'deficient' in
its capacity to learn.
My 'optimism' stems from the fact that it's plainly easy to eliminate
the sxperiential differentials that I addressed in my prior post -
just experience more widely, and the experiential differentials 'go