From: To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Cc: " Subject: Re: Books Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:37:09 +0000 Love to read those studies. They sound interesting. Even if ex-post rationalization occurs, as you suggest, I'm not sure what's game changing about that discovery. Under that theory it would be impossible for people to "wake up" - ie. how can they improve their reasoning if such a change is undetectable? Extensive subliminal reconditioning? Here's a cool story: Not sure why we like helping others. (this guy seems to go in the "really helping others" category, not the "get social acceptance and mollify my sense of worthlessness" category) On 9/11/09 3:07 PM, "Jeffrey Epstein" <[email protected]> wrote: no true„ for example subliminal experminets. showed a strong bias toward info without a concious recognition. . predisposition towards certain outcomes based on faster than cognizable inputs.. , and just think that if statisically, a large numbner of people are doing the same thing , but have wildly different rationales. , wouldn;t we be able to discount their explanaitons. On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM, > wrote: But your hypothesis Isn't faisifiable: we can't tell whether one's internal decision making occurs before or after the decision, if we assume the thinker always believes it to be before regardless of the truth. It seems like the free will controversy - if it feels like free will, does it really matter if it Isn't? On 9/11/09 5:26 AM, "Jeffrey Epstein" <[email protected]> wrote: thank you„ I will do so this weekend.. however, my view is they like most others suffer from the socializaition gene. The behavior dictated by what benefits the group, and then rationalized in the individual mind. this is much more exciting. On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Dear Jeffrey, > wrote: I wanted to explain the books that should have arrived at your house today. They both can up in our discussion in responses to questions you ha