Мартин wrote:No wonder they say, one head is good, but brains are even better.
Well, what are bouncers and these pundits! Have you noticed that? And I love to show off the stock... But La Rochefoucauld said that everyone loves to brag about the lack of availability of
memory, but no one likes to look stupid or talk about the lack of presence of mind. Oh, on the bill "to look stupid" he did not spread the thoughts... That I have already cooked for him...
Again, strangely, but the nuclear bumbescu came up with a very even amnesie people. In America, that we have... But Tama over the ocean, there were others, too, are smart enough to drop it on Hiroshima and Nagasaki... Then during the Soviet uncles-Secretary General, which was to knock the Shoe on the podium at the UN Assembly and gave the whole world "I'll show you gruel!", happened the Cuban missile crisis, which - thank God! - resolved...
I mean people of great intelligence (and/or with a lot of ambition/power) are a BIG problem. No, I have nothing against the existence of the brain. It is quite important and necessary condition in our lives... But not enough.
Somehow on one forum one woman in the conversation (figuratively speaking, of battle of the sexes) showed one conventional wisdom (not feminists, but smart women): "the Man is the head, and the woman is the neck...". I had not to fall face in the dirt (for myself and the other guy
), to complement this the truth that "... the basis for the neck is the chest." And in the chest, as you know, is the HEART. Her objections or answers not found...
Actually, the same thing I wanted to convey to You in the next branch. And then I thought You had enough good intentions and objective (provocation against the forum to prevent), but that means, I think, they don't quite match.
Мартин wrote: matches only "instincts", like eat, but a POS..t.
A small educational program. The word in quotation marks is no longer scientific. People from science it for the parties. Can ask even if the same mass consumption Wikipedia... Then you need to talk about the reference to the needs of the body. In Christianity they speak about this "carnal needs", "human flesh", etc.
Мартин wrote:Yes, and I think everyone in different ways, almost always.
Oh, and how many have the same classifications of people into different types there are... All and Sundry they strive to make... In the European tradition began, for example, with the four temperaments... if It is to integrate the observation of a certain period of time. But in a particular situation, but with different people... Exactly as You say it.
Notice that the above structure is determined not only thinking, but all of our behavior all our lives, starting with perception and ending with the fact, if we talk about the body as we move. "Determined" - I mean the scope and characteristic features. Not everything in the us boils down to just these structures...
I was there to speak about the women... this is one ball (and all others) dance is not learned, but move smoothly and beautifully at the disco, and others, though they are a minority, despite the fact that their face is not disfigured intelligence,
can do it more angular. This can be corrected by the same class in ballroom dancing, but only within certain limits... As well tipsy do not exercise, but for the COP it straight line it is not "dance".
Мартин wrote:in fact, people can have different structures, but they will chirp at the sight of each other.
Can. But only if they have some of these structures that very same... Something in common, TS, Or they just need something from each other. But as soon as they get his or realize that the goal is not achievable, then they
La Moore immediately end. This is a question about what makes an open relationship between people long enough. Where a balance is achieved in similarity (of nearness) and the differences?
By the way,
Martinwhen I'm talking about structures, rely on information from doctors of biology that deals with the brain and not just the brain, and specializiruetsya on its morphology. Had in mind a very definite structure
neural massthat is in the skull... therefore, I have a legitimate question. And You know what, I said? And that's
Rostislav clearly not the chip hawala and hawala not even the fact that he did not hawala.
Well, I thought so...
Мартин wrote:Анатолий Т. wrote:It is the obstacle to understanding. Because one person can see and/or think not as his neighbor...
Understanding is generally quality.
Once more remember "pyramid"
the head-neck-chest. But first... for Poumnichat.
Addiction is not a sentence
independence achievement interdependence - choice. Not all of what my...
So the understanding is a choice of two, which does not always reaches the
bottom. Bottom always is the satisfaction of our heart... the Mind's necessary but not sufficient tool.<
