From: gts (gts@optexinc.com)
Date: Tue Sep 03 2002 - 22:04:12 MDT
Lee,
You're a funny guy and I appreciate your use of language to that end. :)
I do not however appreciate it when it distorts my actual words.
> Be that as it may, I hasten to assure such patient
> readers of the *utmost* importance to Extropianism
> to nail down precisely whether the concept of
> "motivation" is to be extended to every molecular
> motion constituting a human being or not; if we don't
> know what our motives are, then where are we?
This question of whether the concept of motivation is to be extended to
every molecular motion constituting a human being is indeed an important
one. You were the one who introduced it when you mentioned the human
heart-beat.
It is interesting that you have accused me of misusing the English
language, when it was you who attempted to include the beating of the
heart under the category of "human behavior".
My axiom again is "Every human behavior has a motivation." It should be
clear that "human behavior," in the common parlance, refers only to
objectively measurable behavior such as walking a dog or lobbing a
hand-grenade into an enemy trench. It does not refer to internal
biological processes. I entertain the notion only for the purpose of
discussion.
Internal biological processes like the human heart-beat stretch the
definition of "human behavior" and for this reason I feel quite
justified in stretching the definition of "human motivation" to include
primitive motivation such as that of keeping one's organs supplied with
oxygenated blood.
> I never claimed that all motives *had* to be conscious.
Well then why do you oppose my contention that the human heart-beat is
motivated by the desire to provide blood to the organs? It is a
motivation no different than the motivation to consume food, except that
it is unconscious.
> You admit above that we should
> not speak of "having a motive" for crossing one's legs (unless
> the circumstances are exceptional, of course).
I admit no such thing. We cross our legs because we are motivated to
feel more comfortable.
> Is a small baby motivated to move blood through
> its organs?
Yes, though not consciously so.
> I think you mean something closer to "explanation" or
> "reason". Can you think of two equivalent ways of saying
> what you want to say (even if they are each several
> sentences) without using the m-word?
No.
"Reason" implies the participation of the cerebral cortex. Some
motivations are not driven by the cortex. The drive for sexual pleasure
for example is not driven by the cortex. This is perhaps especially true
in men, though it is not necessarily limited only to men. The drive for
sexual satisfaction is only one of many such drives. That some
motivations are unconscious or separate from the cortex does not imply,
much less prove, that every human behavior does not have a motivation.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:41 MST