Smart People?

I read the passage perfectly well enough and pretty well as fast as I read anything else, quickly. After reading a few words without difficulty, I sort of read on, under the presumption that I would not encounter any difficult concept and since there was not one in there, that made getting it read for certain probably easier than some "random" paragraph posted onto EvC.I think, thinking especially in science, HAS altered 'position' relative to language in general and it's grammar as a rule, precisely as Poincare said below:

quote:

---

Science and Method, Henri Poincare, Barnes and Noble Books, 2004(1908)

---

The difference between the ~pre-1900 science and grammar and the thought that changes this position(due in part to Russell) as it is logically written is readable between the blue and yellow highlights below.

quote:

---

Introduction to Logic, Immanual Kant, Philosophical Library 1963 (1800)

---

and yet it is only the position of the Poincare chapters above that enabled me read Poincare here from within Kant's extirpated words BUT NOT THOUGHTS.Spelling is less important than grammar. But with spelling errors, the same mistakes in quickly righting writing logically, results in grammatical errors under the same rule. Thus, letters are often off a bit in this horizon where a letters really a fake symbols or something Derrida would have liked to work more with were he still with us.

OMG tmth!I said, "difficult concept" not none!!The tighttrope is too thin then?

Well, I am sorry you continue to feel this way.If you know anything about my own postings on EVC you will know or could hear from others here that I often to do not use proper English. I could but I do not think this affects my communication when it comes to what matters.So, I really do not see why or how you, for a third time took the bait and continued to not accentuate the postive.I used "ttrope" for either trope or rope but you bit. Sorry for that because really I was trying to agree pretty much with you.This shows why sometimes it IS better to spell, and punctuate, and use grammar correctly since communication down under apparently staid, well stale and burnt. Direct measurement of attentional dwell time in human vision

quote:

---

IN vision, attentional limitations are reflected in interference or reduced accuracy when two objects must be identified at once in a brief display1,2. In our experiments a brief temporal separation was introduced between the two objects to be identified. We measured how long the first object continued to interfere with the second, and hence the time course of the first object's attentional demand. According to conventional serial models, attention is assigned rapidly to one object after another, with a dwell time of only a few dozen milliseconds per item3,4. But we report here that interference lasts for several hundred milliseconds”an order of magnitude more than the prediction of conventional models. We suggest that visual attention is not a high-speed switching mecha-nism, but a sustained state during which relevant objects become available to influence behaviour. This conclusion is consistent with recent physiological results in the monkey5.

---

Otherwise, perhaps you could of seen what I did.Poincare used the word pasigraphy against Russell but to no avail. That was not in the passage nor were their thoughts that extend beyond realtively "brief" dwellings on time. But if it was not English I might have had a block as I do when I try to program something for which I am not prepared with the technique ahead of time. When the rest of the word is not a mess, memory can substitie for collision in our brains.Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.Edited by Brad McFall, : link

There is form and there is matter. There is lexicology and grammatology. For anything else about me or skipping over me and my own please take that to a more proper thread.Psychology and biology are different.Perhaps the person does not believe in hell.Bye for now.

I was going to leave the objectsTrope_(linguistics)]to something 'tight' or taught as we went along.I no longer have an intution for what that might be nor what you are interested in dicussing loosely at all. Why don't you just tell us. Most of the content of your post is within the brain(in series or via a static state), involutarily perpetuated, it seemed to me.Trope was not used by me after a deliberation. But seeing that it could apply to others on the board if they had wanted to question my use of reading then it might have a function. Between you and me it is nothing but a focus. A place to test the interference of the firs and the last. Verbs have more difficulty. On EvC nouns can matterialy get worked out better over time.

Please bring this up in this thread
http://EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall II. -->EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall II.
instead.It is not a shame at all. I put it all out and that leaves a trail for us to follow if THERE IS ANY QUESTION about what was written. I always respond if there is some question to be answered. I would say that out of my tousands of posts perhaps AT MOST I have failed to come back to about 6 or 9 of them that I said I would. If I was continually asked to return to them, I would. I have not been.There is no doubt that I have combined in my thoughts, thoughts that historically have remained seperated.I do not know what you mean "it is ALSO..."You attribute two things to me and yet as far as I know this is the first time you have responded to me.Feel free to engage me in the thread above.I said everything slowly and clearly here
EvC Forum: Teleological Science?Lack of response there can not be due to the topic in this thread. Lack of reponse to threads can tell of something positive as well. Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.