---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Martin J <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Nov 23, 2018 10:08 PM
Subject: Fwd: Re: blog on talking as a behavior or mental process
To: [log in to unmask]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Martin J <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Nov 23, 2018 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: blog on talking as a behavior or mental process
To: [log in to unmask],[log in to unmask],[log in to unmask]
Cc:

> Thanks Greg for your explanation. I wanted to respond to the recent comments, and refer to your scheme, but I did not know quite how to do it. I hope others understand just how your explanation is relevant to how they use words. I might add about my reference to science. My intent was to say something about how some scientist get into the hubris of believing they know The Truth, which is different than the accuracy of many observations. And any physical scientist claiming their tools are the only way to do science. I would say causality is different in the social sciences. We can explain, have explanations that give an understanding but we cannot predict exactly what will happen like can be predicted about throwing a ball up in the air.. for every Mass killer there are thousands of  people who have the same Dynamics but it cannot be predicted which one will act out this way. One issue of Behavior is "free will" that vague issue. Thanks for following my comment. I would be interested in any criticism of these ideas. Martin Johnson.

This may be a second copy for some. My smart phone would not send, but it would forward to one of my accounts, and this is  copy.

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1