tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post4287270744211426199..comments2024-03-14T23:52:09.893-07:00Comments on The Neurocritic: I have to praise you like I shouldThe Neurocritichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-61419898288424174572008-04-26T20:55:00.000-07:002008-04-26T20:55:00.000-07:00I suppose I meant the small q colloquial qualia, r...I suppose I meant the small <I>q</I> colloquial qualia, rather than the large <I>Q</I> philosophical Qualia. Thanks for clearing that up.<BR/><BR/>But some of the most ridiculous press coverage does seem to imply that fairness and money and chocolate <B>are</B> directly substitutable for each other:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/uoc--brt042108.php" REL="nofollow"><B>Brain reacts to fairness as it does to money and chocolate</B></A><BR/><BR/>The human brain responds to being treated fairly the same way it responds to winning money and eating chocolate, UCLA scientists report. Being treated fairly turns on the brain's reward circuitry.<BR/><BR/>"We may be hard-wired to treat fairness as a reward," said study co-author Matthew D. Lieberman...The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-53010913838973522782008-04-26T20:03:00.000-07:002008-04-26T20:03:00.000-07:00Ouch, Neurocritic! You used the Q-word in this pos...Ouch, Neurocritic! You used the Q-word in this post. My long term policy has been to bail on any lecture where the q-word gets used more than twice In this case, I think it suffices to point out that chocolate and sex (and building a good reputation) are not the same because they are not directly substitutable for each other. Then you are less likely to get roving bands of unemployed philosophers descending on this blog arguing about what the q-word really, really refers to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com