Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

Studies of mental functions, behaviors and the nervous system.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#21  Postby Sendraks » Dec 15, 2015 3:09 pm

EvertVd wrote:I think you misunderstand me. I am not looking for constructs nor am I asking others to give me an answer. I may have been unclear about that, sorry. I am asking for insights, trying to understand how others look at the world and deal with it. I do this hoping to find in myself that I am stuck in some sort of tunnel-vision, perhaps I misunderstand something about the constructed world we live in.


I'm still not sure why you think this will help you. This would seem to perpetuate a vicious cycle of thinking to the effect of "people seem to find meaning in that, why can't I?" You're still looking for someone else to provide the meaning.

EvertVd wrote:I could be a dick and ask you to prove that, but I won't ;)

You could have done that, although doing so wouldn't make you a dick.

EvertVd wrote: I get what you are trying to say. But creating a meaning must still fit within the general (world) constructions of politics/monetary/culture etc.


Must it? Why?
There are people throughout history who gave their life meaning by divorcing themselves from society and going away to live in solitude in a cave somewhere. Obviously what they did still fitted in "the world" because they were still on it, but they decided to otherwise ignore all the other social constructs in preference to living alone.

Some of them may have found further meaning by engaging with hitherto unknown magical beings, after a diet rich in mushrooms.

EvertVd wrote: It must make sense to me, otherwise how can it have meaning?

Well yes, whatever it is you find meaning in, must make sense to you. It needn't make sense to anyone else though.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 13643
Age: 101
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#22  Postby EvertVd » Dec 15, 2015 3:25 pm

Sendraks wrote:
I'm still not sure why you think this will help you. This would seem to perpetuate a vicious cycle of thinking to the effect of "people seem to find meaning in that, why can't I?" You're still looking for someone else to provide the meaning.


I am trying to understand other people. How do they look at the world and how does that work. I will fully admit that my methods are perhaps too rational-centric. As I said before (I think) I lack somehow the ability of 'faith', at least regarding this topic. I am trying to learn by watching and listening to others and trying to 'feel' it.


Must it? Why?
There are people throughout history who gave their life meaning by divorcing themselves from society and going away to live in solitude in a cave somewhere. Obviously what they did still fitted in "the world" because they were still on it, but they decided to otherwise ignore all the other social constructs in preference to living alone.

The world is not as big anymore as it once was. Besides I guess fear of being truly alone might keep me from making that step. That said I did live once for a few years in an isolated part of the world. Until one day a government official from that country came by and put me on a plane because I didn't have the right papers. I won't pretend that time of my life was happy, but it was easier somehow, but also very, very, very lonely. I missed looking at people through my window, seeing them living their lives. I am an observer I think. I live by proxy.


Some of them may have found further meaning by engaging with hitherto unknown magical beings, after a diet rich in mushrooms.

I sometimes play with the idea of using drugs...just to see if that helps. Haven't so far, again I'm to scared I think.
EvertVd
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 19
Male

Netherlands (nl)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#23  Postby Sendraks » Dec 15, 2015 3:40 pm

EvertVd wrote:I am trying to understand other people.

So am I. Although I've reached the point where I'm pretty sure it is a fools errand and frankly I don't want to get inside the heads of the people I don't understand.

EvertVd wrote: I am trying to learn by watching and listening to others and trying to 'feel' it.

And you'll come up short when you don't "feel" it.
There are people, like you, who agonise over the fact that they don't "feel" the meaning in things that other people do and convince themselves that there is something wrong with themselves. Rather than just accept "that's not for me and that is perfectly fine."

Lots of people, men mainly, in the UK like sports. In particular the sport of "foot the ball." Me. I don't get it. I provides zero entertainment or interest for me. I've been criticised by others for this in the past, for daring to not conform to the normality of liking football. Fuck them.

Over the years I've learned to trust my instincts for stuff I do like and try not to be steered by what appeals to others.

EvertVd wrote:The world is not as big anymore as it once was.

Whilst I appreciate you are using a turn of phrase here, the reality is that the world is still as big as it once. The vast majority of the Earth's surface is not inhabited by human beings. There are still hermits in the world to this day and an abundance of remote places to go hermit in.

EvertVd wrote:Besides I guess fear of being truly alone might keep me from making that step. That said I did live once for a few years in an isolated part of the world. Until one day a government official from that country came by and put me on a plane because I didn't have the right papers. I won't pretend that time of my life was happy, but it was easier somehow, but also very, very, very lonely. I missed looking at people through my window, seeing them living their lives. I am an observer I think. I live by proxy.


It is a weird need to see human beings on a regular basis but, I do know what you mean. Sometimes I wonder which is worse, to be truly alone and not be able to reach out to another human being, or to live amongst people and still be unable to reach out? As an individual with a history of depression and generalised anxiety disorder, I've plenty of experience of the latter, little of the former.

I suggest that you take the "fear of being truly alone" and put that to one side. Then look at what it was about that time in your life that made you happy.

EvertVd wrote:I sometimes play with the idea of using drugs...just to see if that helps. Haven't so far, again I'm to scared I think.


It didn't do much for me. I've tried to "squeegee my third eye" and I'm afraid no great universal epiphany was forthcoming.
However, I am me and you are you. So be steered by your own thoughts on the matter rather than by what I experienced.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 13643
Age: 101
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#24  Postby THWOTH » Dec 15, 2015 4:52 pm

Yes, we live in a constructed society. Money is a construct; politics is a construct; manners , morals and ethics are a construct; science is a construct; theology is a construct; race is a construct; the law is a cpnstruct; architecture is a construction ... etc ... etc ...

We are constructed people in a constructed world. But why build a mansion when a shack will do?
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Name: Penrose
Posts: 36924
Age: 52

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#25  Postby surreptitious57 » Dec 15, 2015 5:29 pm

Evert wrote:
I am trying to understand other people. How do they look at the world and how does that work

This is how I look at the world and how it works for me [ not in any particular order other than by length ]

Your brain is a virtual reality generator [ I nicked this from hackenslash so credit to him for that ]

The easiest person to fool is yourself [ I also nicked this but this time from Mark Twain ]

There is no such thing as a good or bad person only people who do good or bad things

I have mild obsessive compulsive disorder which has some strange manifestations

I am as free as can be while still alive after making peace with death last year

I am an egalitarian who thinks all human beings should be treated equally

The scientific method is brutal and uncompromising because it has to be

I try to surround myself with those that are more intelligent than me

Mathematics is so perfect it could not possibly have been invented

I am an existential nihilist who thinks there is no meaning to life

I try to surround myself with those that think differently to me

The sermon on the mount is absolutely beautiful in principle

I am an agnostic atheist who does not think that God exists

I am an apatheist who does not actually care if God exists

When I die I will be as free as it is actually possible to be
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 8544

Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#26  Postby Sendraks » Dec 15, 2015 6:09 pm

Also - don't fall into the trap of trying to convince yourself that you're "special" somehow and thats why you cant connect with all these other mundane humans around you.

Very easy to make yourself depressed trying to convince yourself that you are not into the same mundane shite as everyone else, when in fact odds are your life is just as banal as everyone else's.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 13643
Age: 101
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#27  Postby jamest » Dec 15, 2015 11:41 pm

THWOTH wrote:Yes, we live in a constructed society. Money is a construct; politics is a construct; manners , morals and ethics are a construct; science is a construct; theology is a construct; race is a construct; the law is a cpnstruct; architecture is a construction ... etc ... etc ...

Everything we 'think' is a construct, including the concept of humanity itself.

What's profoundly ironic is the number of times I've read threads like this one where people belittle others for constructing meaning in their lives, when every single shred of knowledge they have about themselves and their relation to their world is an artefact of others' construction of knowledge (science, whatever), which they have learnt and selectively chosen to employ in coming to their meaningful decision that nothing is meaningful. :lol:

I mean, fuck me with a pointy asteroid. The light doesn't get much dimmer than this.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16140
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#28  Postby logical bob » Dec 15, 2015 11:50 pm

Is this where you come out with something really deep like "if nothing was true that would be a truth"?
User avatar
logical bob
 
Posts: 4482
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#29  Postby surreptitious57 » Dec 15, 2015 11:57 pm

What shall your opinion on the meaningfulness of meaning be when the entire human race becomes extinct?
Will you still be clinging to this ridiculous notion that we are really important in the grand scheme of things?
How will you actually be able to think anything when you will be in a state of permanent non consciousness?
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 8544

Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#30  Postby jamest » Dec 16, 2015 1:02 am

logical bob wrote:Is this where you come out with something really deep like "if nothing was true that would be a truth"?

My last post was akin to The Mariana Trench, as it utterly destroys all of this bollocks about there being no meaning. Try reading it again, but with the lights on.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16140
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#31  Postby THWOTH » Dec 16, 2015 1:09 am

jamest wrote:
THWOTH wrote:Yes, we live in a constructed society. Money is a construct; politics is a construct; manners , morals and ethics are a construct; science is a construct; theology is a construct; race is a construct; the law is a cpnstruct; architecture is a construction ... etc ... etc ...

Everything we 'think' is a construct, including the concept of humanity itself.

What's profoundly ironic is the number of times I've read threads like this one where people belittle others for constructing meaning in their lives, when every single shred of knowledge they have about themselves and their relation to their world is an artefact of others' construction of knowledge (science, whatever), which they have learnt and selectively chosen to employ in coming to their meaningful decision that nothing is meaningful. :lol:

I mean, fuck me with a pointy asteroid. The light doesn't get much dimmer than this.

Hmm. :coffee:
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Name: Penrose
Posts: 36924
Age: 52

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#32  Postby jamest » Dec 16, 2015 1:20 am

surreptitious57 wrote:What shall your opinion on the meaningfulness of meaning be when the entire human race becomes extinct?

What shall your opinion on the meaningfulness of meaning be after I've just explained that NOT ONE SINGLE thought is devoid of meaning, including the thought that there is no meaning?

What you're doing, and others here, is confusing 'meaning' with 'caring'. As in, what's the fucking point of caring IF oblivion is guaranteed (regardless of the fact that nobody has established this as a definite fact)? Which has fuck all to do with the point that anything and everything we think has meaning.

The OP is seemingly depressed/distressed/anxious (which I'm genuinely sorry to hear), but this has nothing to do with the fact that there is no meaning, and has everything to do with the fact that he (?) has constructed a negative meaning for himself in the light of selectively chosen meaningful knowledge, leading to the negative emotions/feelings which now trouble him.

People need to stop talking bollocks about there being no meaning, as we are inundated with the stuff. All there is, are positive and negative responses to whichever meaningful route that we follow. THAT, is the most profound thing any depressed mind will ever hear, if they take the time to digest it.

These silly fucking threads about there being no meaning are more stupid than the conspiracy threads about the
moon landings. As I said, it really doesn't get much dimmer than this.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16140
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#33  Postby logical bob » Dec 16, 2015 1:32 am

This is a thread started, as you note, by an unhappy person looking for answers. So if we're going to kick your philosophy around some more I think it would be polite to take it back to the philosophy section rather than take over this thread. If EvertVd wishes to try on the robes and sandals, (s)he can ask.
User avatar
logical bob
 
Posts: 4482
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#34  Postby jamest » Dec 16, 2015 1:35 am

logical bob wrote:This is a thread started, as you note, by an unhappy person looking for answers. So if we're going to kick your philosophy around some more I think it would be polite to take it back to the philosophy section rather than take over this thread. If EvertVd wishes to try on the robes and sandals, (s)he can ask.

I didn't mention robes and sandals, least of all God. My posts here are specifically dealing with the concept of meaning. If you can't see that then your bulb has gone.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16140
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#35  Postby THWOTH » Dec 16, 2015 1:42 am

Hmm. :coffee:
"No-one is exempt from speaking nonsense – the only misfortune is to do it solemnly."
Michel de Montaigne, Essais, 1580
User avatar
THWOTH
RS Donator
 
Name: Penrose
Posts: 36924
Age: 52

Country: Untied Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#36  Postby logical bob » Dec 16, 2015 1:59 am

OK then. You're right to say that the identification of meaning is a value judgement, a question of whether or not to care. There's also a lot of meaning around in the sense of information, and information exists whether anyone cares about it or not. I don't think these two senses of meaning are being confused here.

Different people have different thresholds for caring. Cito is content to care about crossword puzzles, EvertVd not so much. If someone doesn't feel their threshold has been reached then you can't reason them across it with meaning in the sense of information. Crank offered science, and the new perspective on the world it offers, as a candidate for something to care about. Robes and sandals could do the same job. It's the equivalent of having a go with a shiny new toy. Caring is not compulsory.

I think that down there in the Mariana Trench you were maybe saying that if one concludes that all this isn't worth caring about because it's a construction then this conclusion is itself a construction. Cito already pointed that out more succinctly. You probably feel that this invalidates the conclusion, or at least (since you can't invalidate a value judgement) makes it inconsistent. We've written pages about this over the years, ever since the Relativism is Self-Refuting debate back at RDF. It's not breaking news.
User avatar
logical bob
 
Posts: 4482
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#37  Postby jamest » Dec 16, 2015 3:43 am

logical bob wrote:OK then. You're right to say that the identification of meaning is a value judgement,

Not necessarily a 'value' judgement. Every single word/phrase in the dictionary/google has meaning, but the meaning of most dictionary/google entries is not contingent upon their value to me nor anyone else [except in increasing our vocabulary]. For instance, I don't need to give two shits to understand what a worm is/means. That is, I can understand a concept without caring either way.

... a question of whether or not to care.

No, you've missed the point. The construction of knowledge occurs with or without caring, and the consumption of this knowledge occurs with or without caring. The point remains that any concept/notion/idea/philosophy we construct via definition is meaningful, regardless of whether we care. And given that there cannot be a coherent thought devoid of meaningful concepts/notions/ideas/philosophies, then EVERY [coherent] thought must be meaningful. Which is why it is fubar to say that the world is devoid of meaning, in any context, except when conflating 'meaning' with 'caring'.


There's also a lot of meaning around in the sense of information, and information exists whether anyone cares about it or not. I don't think these two senses of meaning are being confused here.

Oh yes they are, because if they weren't then I would have no need to explain that life's meaning does not hinge upon the emotional responses people have in response to the meanings they prefer to embrace (as opposed to the meanings they prefer to reject). The meaning of something, including life, has to be devoid of emotional input... and must be left entirely to our scientists/mathematicians/philosophers/etc. to decide. The 'meaning' of life is merely a definition of what life is, and that is a metaphysical debate. Whereas the value of life hinges upon whichever conclusion one prefers, from the debate.

... So, you see, [the meaning of] meaning and value are technically poles-apart. The OP isn't depressed because there is no meaning in/to life. He's depressed because he sees no value to the meanings that he has chosen to embrace. That is, he's depressed/anxious because his evaluation of a selected meaning, troubles him.


Different people have different thresholds for caring.

You say this as though intelligence has no bearing on the matter, nor the direction in which this intelligence moves.

Cito is content to care about crossword puzzles,

Then he's telling porkies, otherwise he wouldn't be here when he could be doing crossword puzzles. Cito cares more than he wants to tell you. He's a smart chap. I like him, regardless of what he says about me.


EvertVd not so much. If someone doesn't feel their threshold has been reached then you can't reason them across it with meaning in the sense of information.

Nonsense. The guy has fallen into a pit of his own making based upon the preferential meanings he has partaken of. He owes it to himself to extract himself from this pit, since his preference for meaning is fubar and not worthy of a lifetime of anxiety and depression (such value judgements thereof). At the very least, he could then live care-free for the remainder of his life, since his existential crisis is not justified one jot.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16140
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#38  Postby surreptitious57 » Dec 16, 2015 4:03 am

jamest wrote:
What you are doing and others here is confusing meaning with caring. As in what is the fucking point of caring
IF oblivion is guaranteed (regardless of the fact that nobody has established this as a definite fact)? Which has
fuck all to do with the point that anything and everything we think has meaning

The OP is seemingly depressed/distressed/anxious (which I am genuinely sorry to hear) but this has nothing to do with the
fact that there is no meaning and has everything to do with the fact that he (?) has constructed a negative meaning for him
self in the light of selectively chosen meaningful knowledge leading to the negative emotions/feelings which now trouble him

People need to stop talking bollocks about there being no meaning, as we are inundated with the stuff. All there is are positive and negative responses to whichever meaningful route that we follow. THAT is the most profound thing any depressed mind will ever hear if they take the time to digest it

I certainly am not confusing meaning with caring. Indeed I understand perfectly well the need for the latter which would
be impossible to have without empathy. Hence why I am not a moral nihilist but an existential one. But that however is
only temporary and so does not address the problem of objective meaning in the grand scheme of things as opposed to
subjective meaning in the here and now. But you can still live a full life yet accept the inevitability of your own death

Nobody has established oblivion as a fact? Life on this planet shall simply become unsustainable a billion years from
now because of the rise in oceanic temperature. Even if we manage to colonise another planet in the meantime we
shall eventually become extinct as all species do. Indeed ninety nine per cent of all known ones are already extinct

I agree there are positive and negative responses to whatever route one chooses in life. But that has got nothing to
do with there being no objective meaning in the grand scheme of things. And I truly think this which is why I am an
existential nihilist. I could be wrong though I see zero reason to think otherwise at this point in time. You obviously
think differently on this yet you can not offer a reason as to why that is beyond the fact that that is what you want
Which is not a reason as such but an appeal to emotion. And which as you know is just a logical fallacy so is invalid

I do not care what particular world view anyone has since my existential nihilism is just my own personal philosophy
I am not trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking. Whereas you cannot stand anyone thinking differently from
you which is why you are so contemptuous of alternative views. Yet you offer no reason here as to why you are right
You just expect me to agree with you regardless. Well sorry I am not going to accept something as true just because
you say so. I do not care what others think anyway. For that is beyond my control. I only focus on what I think about
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 8544

Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#39  Postby laklak » Dec 16, 2015 4:13 am

Get a dog, there are great truths lodged in their fuzzy doggy heads. A bowl of kibble, a jug of water, maybe a squirrel to chase, that's all they need. Add something to hump and Oh, wilderness is paradise enow. They don't worry about what other dogs think of them or whether their reality matches up with the cat's. They don't give a shit about the Dow Jones or Donald Trump's hairdo. A really great day is a ride in the car, a belly rub, and a stuffed toy to eviscerate. We can learn a lot from them, though I must admit some canine habits are best not emulated, eating cat shit springs to mind.

All those wooish suggestions - you know the ones - mindfullness, living in the moment, being true to yourself, being at one with the universe, yada yada - fuck mate, dogs are past masters at ALL that crap. They understand, on a very base level, that there is no meaning outside what they generate on the fly, moment to moment, day to day. Maybe some dogs sit around and discuss weighty subjects, like "God" being "Dog" spelled backwards, but if they do it doesn't get in the way of .... SQUIRREL!!!!
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 16377
Age: 63
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Map and territory - a cognitive fallacy question

#40  Postby igorfrankensteen » Dec 16, 2015 4:14 am

I have some observations to suggest that you add to your envisioning of the world of "constructs."

* You are correct that many people who deal with the large number of human constructs, aren't able to appreciate them as thoroughly as would be most useful. There are reasons other than delusion or blindness to this, which are important to recognize in assembling your picture of reality.

* One of the reasons, is that after enough time has elapsed, and enough has been done in building and maintaining the constructs, they become functionally as essential to the world as the non-human elements.

* Many human constructs are integrated into each other, and into the rest of the world, that they indeed CAN'T be changed, wholesale. Many people know this intuitively, but can't say it clearly, because they haven't thought it through that well, or because they don't have a sufficiently objective point of view.

* Humans are simultaneously independent realities, as well as being imaginary constructs, at one and the same time. Add in that we are all trying to understand ourselves from the inside out, from within our own personal constructs, and the amount of subtlety which must be recognized at any given moment, becomes tremendously complex.

* In fact, many of our constructs are not intended to be artificial at all, but are attempts to deal with the real world, using what might be called a Virtual interface. They don't interfere with our integration into the real world, they (at least try to) enhance it, make it more thoroughly possible.

* It is VERY common, in such a complicated world, for individuals to come to forget that many things ARE constructs.

* It is even more common, for people to be limited in how well they can express themselves, such that even though they do know well, what is and isn't immutable in the world, they fail to describe why they wont try to make changes in a manner that reflects this. If nothing else, saying something is impossible (when the speaker knows it isn't) is actually done in order to save time, rather than to obscure or lie.

* While it may not be possible to come to a complete and perfect integration with and comprehension of existence, it might well be entirely possible to come to a close to perfect understanding and appreciation of the imperfections and limits we suffer from, in our perceptions of it. And that will allow us to maximize what we can do.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 64
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Psychology & Neuroscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest