Doug Morris

Please clarify.

We are aware that we are aware.

Why not?

If we change our mind about something, we no longer consider the old thought to be true, but we still can consider it to be an instance of thinking. As long as we don't change our mind about something, we still consider the old thought to be true, even if we have thought about other questions in the meantime.

Where is the evidence that we are enough like Latin America to be in the same danger they're in?

I'm objecting to deporting people without due process.

We can remember past instances of thinking and sensing. This makes them valid specimens.

His aim is like aiming a shotgun with an unsteady hand. Anyone who commits a crime or is caught preparing one can be arrested and held without violating due process. Due process also allows putting people under surveillance if there are sufficient grounds. Where is the evidence that we are in any danger of that?

Suspending habeas corpus is one thing. Rushing someone off to a foreign country and then saying that is irreversible is something else. And Trump has talked about doing this to citizens too.

One serious problem with Trump's actions is that he had people rushed into a foreign country and then claimed that this put the matter both out of his control and out of the courts' jurisdiction. He should have at lest kept them in the USA where his responsibility would still be clear and due process could still be applied.

I should have made clear she also used the much older technique of examining impaired subjects and seeing what brain damage had what effect on function.

As far as I can tell, you are misapplying or incorrectly interpreting, period.

Until recently I had assumed that thinking depends on language. If I understand correctly, Ayn Rand took this view, as did many others. A neuroscientist at MIT named Evelina Fedorenko has spent 15 years researching this, using modern brain-imaging techniques. Her conclusion: language and thought are, in fact, distinct entities that the brain processes separately, and the highest levels of cognition can proceed without an assist from words or linguistic structures. She co-authored a recent perspective article in Nature and was interviewed in the March issue of Scientific American (starting on page 86). I have read the interview but no other material. If she is right, this has big implications for epistemology and for understanding the nature of the faculty of reason. If she is wrong, it would help to prove it. So far I haven't made plans to devote any more of my time to this. But it calls for a further look.

I have a mild form of colorblindness. I would rather not have it. Does that make me a fake? My body works pretty well for my age, but I would like it to work better. Does that make me a fake? i would rather not sunburn as easily as I do. Does that make me a fake? Are people who get plastic surgery necessarily fakes? I've gotten a lot of dental extractions, implants, and crowns, and a bridge. Does that make me a fake?

My condolences.