"Entertained by my own EIMC" <write_to_eimc from ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:461109ff$0$15007$5a62ac22 from per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> "Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemore2 from yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4610ed18$0$24160$ed362ca5 from nr2.newsreader.com...> <snip>
>> The general point to be made is that, in many, many cases in
>> neuroscience, behavior hasn't been broken down into the right analytical
>> units - that is, the conceptual structure inherited from mainstream
>> psychology is, literally, nonsense.
>> You obvously both have a valid point AND get to feel good by making it.
>>> Note that, despite Kandel's careless
> > language, "habituation" is conceptually clean.
>> IOW, it is a concept you can understand.
No, I mean that when you take time to carefully analyze it, it isn't stupid
like the storage and retrieval metaphors and 99% of the other junk that
characterizes cognitve "science."