> Well, I loved your first post, quite interesting.
Thanx
> I am curious about your
> definitions of L2, L3 and L4 religions. I did agree with what you were
saying
> though.
Please allow me not to define those next levels, at the moment. They are too
complicated, even to me ;-) I will try to produce some nice, English text
about it in the nearest future, but currently I am too busy for that. In a
two weeks time i will be able to post it.
>The last sentence confuses me a litte, i need a reason why the Asian
> religions would be more abstract.
(Well, I was pretty sure that the reason would not be discussed, but I
really didn't realize how strong is anti-genetic lobby here :-)
I stated so, basing on a very well documented comparisons, eg. WAIS-R
normalization tables, which show very clearly the diference between
caucasoids and mongoloids. Those last scored about one SD higher in spatial
ability tests. I am aware of similiar results in Raven's Progressive
Matrices Test. There is an article in 'Scientific American' (May '98) about
spatial and verbal abilities also.
These results seem to be questionable [?] in view of some CoV'ers, but I
cannot agree with such critiques.
> Are you
> suggesting that there is something about Asian culture that would more
easily
> support abstract god thinking instead of the west's monotheistic view??
Yes and no. If they think abstractively in spite of theirs racial abilities,
my ideas seem reasonable. But of course I didn't mean 'culture' but genetic
profile.
> As A. J. Greimas states in Chapter 10 of "On Meaning" (titled 'Knowing and
>Believing: A Single Cognitive Universe), the only difference between
>these two is external to the mind (the presence or absence of
>evidence). The neuronal/synaptic flow patterns corresponding to
>these two states of mind are indistinguishable.
I haven't heard about this book, but I did about at least 12 stating
contrary.
--- Michal Kulczycki University of Wroclaw, Psychology Dept. E-mail: ronan@dawid.uni.wroc.pl ICQ #: 8954988PS. I am used to cut post in a UseNet manner, I believe it is not a crime here.