Re: The Structure of Scientific Evolutions, <link>

These two concepts are mine, both written about and published on my web site in 1999 and 2000. 1) The superstition instinct here: <link>

2) the "unintended consequence of evolution" concept here: <link>

I've written the Times about the superstition instinct many times. I don't remember whether I specifically wrote Wade about it, but I probably did. The superstition instinct is my idea.

I ran into Wright at the EP conference in 2000 and told him about Hypoism, the disease that causes all addictions, the brain mechanism from which they are derived, and that it is an "unintended consequence of evolution." In fact, this paper (2) was presented as a poster at the 2000 conference. "Unintended consequence of evolution" concept is mine, my idea.

The implication of these ideas are enormous. They are my ideas.

"He who binds to himself a joy

Does the winged life destroy

But he who kisses the joy as it flies

Lives in Eternity's sunrise."

William Blake (1757 - 1827)

Nothing is intended, or "unitended" by evolution. Using these words implys design by a creator

no it doesn't.

Beautiful, Toby!

Dan, just remember, although we all know and love Einstein, he has no idea (well, probably), that we all know and love him. We're all dust in the end.

Possibly the quickest way to spread your ideas and potentially help the highest number of addicts: put your handbook, in its entirety, on the web and ask folks to report their results back via an open (uncensored) survey and/or forum.

(And as you yourself are admittedly and proudly hypoic, may I borrow from your teachings and suggest that you ask an objective, knowledgeable third party to guide your decisions regarding the development of a website for this purpose. Certain aesthetics, language and tone will inevitably undermine your attempt to spread your message. Contact a former addict who works in the marketing arena, perhaps.)

When asked where the right hypothesis come from Einstein replied "Intuition, with a sympathetic understanding of experience.". Choosing the right hypothesis - of the literally infinite possibilities - is the basis of all science. Any hack can perform the formulation/experimentation. Sometimes the means are available to "prove" the hypothesis to the satisfaction of many in the scientific community, and sometimes the means are not so available and the "proof" is experiential. There's no logical basis to say that the inability or unwillingness of the current scientific establishment to put its "proof" stamp on things necessarily puts something in the category of superstition.

I define "superstition" as belief without proof. Not only has the hijacked brain hypothesis not been proved, it's been disproved. That makes it by definition superstition. Moreover, Hypoism has been proved. Read: <link>

It's there: <link> There are also many chapters from the book free to read. Have you read them? Why not deal with the science, not me. That would help the largest number of addicts and their families.

The word "unintended" is in quotes. That means it's a metaphor, a concept. You ought to read the paper, <link> it's based on. comment on the paper as compared to your concept and your science. I don't think you can, not with science anyway. While you're at it, read the science at: <link>

I call shennanigans!

I wrote that poem on the back of a luggage claim check in the Atlanta airport in 2006! <Lincoln>

It is my idea and I want credit for it! 8<(