Skip to content

WHY WE SHOULD READ SENECA NOT…

WHY WE SHOULD READ SENECA NOT, SAY, LEHRER. From Chapt 22: NEUROBABBLEWhen it comes to narratives, the brain seems to be the last province of the theoretician-charlatan. Add neurosomething to a field, and suddenly it rises in respectability and becomes more convincing as people now have the illusion of a strong causal link—yet the brain is too complex for that; it is both the most complex part of the human anatomy and the one that is the most susceptible to sucker-causation and charlatanism of the type “Proust was a neuroscientist”. Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons brought to my attention in their book The Invisible Gorilla the evidence I had been looking for: whatever theory has a reference in it to the brain circuitry seems more “scientific” and more convincing, even when it is just is randomized psycho-neuro-babble.

via WHY WE SHOULD READ… | Facebook.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*