10-14-2013, 07:38 PM
(10-13-2013, 08:44 PM)milo Wrote: You are . . . Slow to connect to sarcasm?
No, just attempting to augment yours.
(Irony is a tricky business, no?)
(10-14-2013, 02:38 AM)abu nuwas Wrote: Thank you for that, Ray. I think the study would be interesting, but the abstract is crap. For example, ''evocative'' and ''difficult'' would need some clarifying. Who decided? Did the subjects decide that this or that was to be ticked as ''difficult''? Or did the researchers? I might v well regard a piece as difficult, which Matron would regard as simplistic nonsense. A London ex-pat living in Lesotho might well find a few clues as evocative of his, or even her, native city -red pillar-boxes, buses, cricket at the Oval --- whereas a native of Lesotho, although a speaker of perfect English, might have far less feelings aroused. (That last word was just for Billy)
Reminds me of astrology. Sequential brain scans (fMRI) and telescopes
provide information that is experimentally verifiable and that serves as
the basis for all manner of hypotheses. But the fact that the future
positions of planets can be predicted does not prove (or disprove)
that these positions can be used to predict what my day will be like
tomorrow.
a brightly colored fungus that grows in bark inclusions