http://visitcryptoville.com/2014/10/16/c...than-good/

EXCERPT: Cryptozoology lovers are no doubt enjoying all the latest TV shows delving into the mysteries of monsters from all parts of the United States. Bigfoot, Swamp Beast, Saber Wolves and all the rest are fair game to these intrepid investigators. But is any of it real?

Like many of you I’ve been enjoying the latest rash of TV programs about the cryptids we love to think about. We have Destination America channel’s Mountain Monsters, Swamp Monsters, Alaska Monsters and the very popular Cryptid: Swamp Beast over on History Channel.

I’d like to share with you my thoughts about these shows and my perceived problems with them, then get into whether they help or hurt the cause for serious investigation into these creatures....

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...070138.htm

ARTICLE: Math describes and predicts the world all around us -- from the helical structure of DNA to the spirals of galaxies. But does this mean our world is inherently mathematical?

The question has become a hot topic of debate as neuroscientists continue to uncover mathematical abilities we seem to be born with, and have pinpointed regions in the brain responsible for mathematical thinking. "[N]umbers are not properties of the universe, but rather they reflect the biological grounding for how people make sense of the world," says Rafael Núñez, professor of cognitive science at the University of California, San Diego and member of UCSD's Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind.

Says Brian Butterworth, emeritus professor of cognitive neuropsychology at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London, "Numbers are not necessarily a property of the universe, but rather a very powerful way of describing some aspects of the universe."

Núñez and Butterworth are among four scientists who recently grappled with this question at the invitation of The Kavli Foundation. Offering a different perspective: physicists Simeon Hellerman and Max Tegman. "I think many physicists, including myself, agree that there should be some complete description of the universe and the laws of nature," says Hellerman, associate professor at the Kavli Institute for Physics and Mathematics of the Universe at the University of Tokyo, Japan. "Implicit in that assumption is the universe is intrinsically mathematical."

"[N]ature is clearly giving us hints that the universe is mathematical," says Tegmark, professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and member of MIT's Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research. According to Tegmark, many mathematicians even feel that they don't invent mathematical structures, "they just discover them -- that these mathematical structures exist independently of humans."

Tegman also points out this isn't just interesting as an academic idea; if correct, then mathematics has a special role for advancing human knowledge.

"If math is inherent out in the universe, then mathematics can give us hints for solving future problems in physics," Tegman says. "If we really believe that nature is fundamentally mathematical, then we should look for mathematical patterns and regularities when we come across phenomena that we don't understand. This problem-solving approach has been at the heart of physics' success for the past 500 years."

EXCERPT: First published Wed Mar 18, 2009; substantive revision Fri Oct 17, 2014

Thomas Reid held a direct realist theory of memory. Like his direct realism about perception, Reid developed his account as an alternative to the model of the mind that he called ‘the theory of ideas.’ On such a theory, mental operations such as perception and memory have mental states—ideas or impressions—as their direct objects. These mental states are understood as representations that encode information about their causes. The mind is directed towards and reads off from these representations, information about extra-mental items. By contrast, Reid holds that the direct objects of memory and perception are extra-mental. In the case of perception, the mind is directed to present material objects and properties; in the case of memory, the mind is directed towards past events to which the person was agent or witness. In other words, according to Reid, when we remember, we do not recall previous experiences. In memory, the mind is directed neither towards an idea experienced previously nor towards an idea of a previous experience. Rather, we recall events, experienced previously.

Reid is interested in the notion of memory not only for its own sake but also because of its conceptual connection to the notion of personal identity. Reid criticizes Locke's theory of personal identity for inferring a metaphysical hypothesis now called the Memory Theory from the conceptual connection between memory and personal identity. On this theory, personal identity consists in memory; sameness of memory is metaphysically necessary and sufficient for sameness of persons. According to Reid, memory is neither necessary nor sufficient for personal identity, metaphysically speaking. Indeed, Reid holds that it is impossible to account for personal identity in any terms other than itself. Personal identity is simple and unanalyzable. Though memory is not the metaphysical ground of personal identity, according to Reid, it provides first-personal evidence of personal identity. I know that I was present at my graduation because I remember being there. Memories do not make one the same person over time. Rather, memories allow one to know one's own past, immediately and directly....

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/comte/

EXCERPT: First published Wed Oct 1, 2008; substantive revision Thu Oct 16, 2014

Auguste Comte (1798–1857) is the founder of positivism, a philosophical and political movement which enjoyed a very wide diffusion in the second half of the nineteenth century. It sank into an almost complete oblivion during the twentieth, when it was eclipsed by neopositivism. However, Comte's decision to develop successively a philosophy of mathematics, a philosophy of physics, a philosophy of chemistry and a philosophy of biology, makes him the first philosopher of science in the modern sense, and his constant attention to the social dimension of science resonates in many respects with current points of view. His political philosophy, on the other hand, is even less known, because it differs substantially from the classical political philosophy we have inherited....

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intentionality/

EXCERPT: First published Thu Aug 7, 2003; substantive revision Wed Oct 15, 2014

Intentionality is the power of minds to be about, to represent, or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs. The puzzles of intentionality lie at the interface between the philosophy of mind and the philosophy of language. The word itself, which is of medieval Scholastic origin, was rehabilitated by the philosopher Franz Brentano towards the end of the nineteenth century. ‘Intentionality’ is a philosopher's word. It derives from the Latin word intentio, which in turn derives from the verb intendere, which means being directed towards some goal or thing. The entry falls into eleven sections...

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/death/

EXCERPT: First published Wed May 22, 2002; substantive revision Fri Oct 17, 2014

This article considers several questions concerning death and its ramifications.

First, what constitutes death? It is clear enough that people die when their lives end, but less clear what constitutes the ending of a person's life.

Second, in what sense might death or posthumous events harm us? To answer this question, we will need to know what it is for something to be in our interests.

Third, what is the case for and the case against the harm thesis, the claim that death can harm the individual who dies, and the posthumous harm thesis, according to which events that occur after an individual dies can still harm that individual?

Fourth, how might we solve the timing puzzle? This puzzle is the problem of locating the time during which we incur harm for which death and posthumous events are responsible.

A fifth controversy concerns whether all deaths are misfortunes or only some. Of particular interest here is a dispute between Thomas Nagel, who says that death is always an evil, since continued life always makes good things accessible, and Bernard Williams, who argues that, while premature death is a misfortune, it is a good thing that we are not immortal, since we cannot continue to be who we are now and remain meaningfully attached to life forever.

A final controversy concerns whether or not the harmfulness of death can be reduced. It may be that, by adjusting our conception of our well-being, and by altering our attitudes, we can reduce or eliminate the threat death poses us. But there is a case to be made that such efforts backfire if taken to extremes....

http://www.uib.no/en/news/81971/fairness-brain

SNIP: Ever wondered how people figure out what is fair? Look to the brain for the answer. According to a new Norwegian brain study, people appreciate fairness in much the same way as they appreciate money for themselves, and also that fairness is not necessarily that everybody gets the same income....

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2...102014.php

SNIP: New data presented today indicate that consumers of frozen meals had higher daily intakes of dietary fiber, potassium, calcium and protein, and lower daily intakes of calories and saturated fat than consumers of quick service restaurant (QSR) meals....