Another attempt to put a limit on science

New woo alert. New to me anyway. This one is really slipping in through a backdoor.
A mathematician figured out how to use crochet to model negative curvature. Coral does this naturally.] So, they are making these art installation. Very cool, brings in the families, gives a reason to think about math, also brings attention to global warming that is killing reefs. No problem.
Until you find out more about this Institute for Figuring. The women behind it are perpetuating old myths about free will, dualism, science vs religion, the usual stuff. I still love Krista Tippet, but I can’t figure out why she can’t get a handle on these concepts.]

Frailty, thy name is woman. (Although Khaleesi IS coming to Westeros.)
I think that women have typically had some cultural disadvantages that, in general, lead them to accept inaccurate views of reality (although the inaccurate views, have typically been originated and perpetuated by men).
e.g., A little boy who tells other children what’s what is considered to have leadership qualities. A little girl, who does the same, is pejoratively considered to be bossy.

It is said that women are more right brain oriented than men (on average), whereas men are more left brain oriented. If this is true, then the following may be of interest as it explains the characteristics of data processing in the right and left hemispheres of the brain.
http://www.web-us.com/brain/right_left_brain_characteristics.htm

We shouldn’t allow our corpus collsosum to go to waste. Best to use both hemispheres.

We shouldn't allow our corpus collsosum to go to waste. Best to use both hemispheres.
We all use both hemispheres, but there seems to be a natural mental leaning toward one or the other, which is later expressed in the person's areas of interest, such as art or sciences or social skills.

I thought we covered this.]

I thought we covered this.]
Yes, and if people don't read the threads, we'll cover it again.

The following is from another article on the same site (LiveScience).

In general, the left hemisphere is dominant in language: processing what you hear and handling most of the duties of speaking. It's also in charge of carrying out logic and exact mathematical computations. When you need to retrieve a fact, your left brain pulls it from your memory. The right hemisphere is mainly in charge of spatial abilities, face recognition and processing music. It performs some math, but only rough estimations and comparisons. The brain's right side also helps us to comprehend visual imagery and make sense of what we see. It plays a role in language, particularly in interpreting context and a person's tone.
So I'm wondering what the article cited by Lausten supposedly proves?? The only result actually reported is that the amount of activity on both sides of the brain is the same for everyone, while resting. Which demonstrates ...... what, exactly? TFS
I thought we covered this.]
I read the link, thank you, very informative. However I have one complaint about the brevity of the presentation. for instance:
IMO, I do not understand why brains "at rest" would show any extraordinary signs, ecxept "being at rest" and "on idle". Was the intent to measure fantasies, dreams, or to obtain brain activity when exposed to real world images. It would have been much more convincing if the article included if the subjects at physical rest, but mentally aware were exposed to images of very carefully selected scenes which would certainly produce a response of a specific emotional areas of interest. Degrees of emotional responses to images external and internal events is the test that should be performed, IMHO. To me it seems entirely possible that the neural systems in both hemispheres are specialized in areas were their neural structure can easily evolve new related neurons, while in the other hemisphere the neural network allows for the formation of other specialized but related functions. It has nothing to do with intelligentce or prejudial treatment. The question is if it is physically convenient for the brain to have specialized hemispheres? Octopi have brains in their tentacles, because it is convenient for the octopus to have them there. What has Evolution to say about this? Does our Mirror Neural Network have anything to do with it? The place where empathy and sympathy reside.

I’m not going to go rooting around for articles on this, the claim was, “We all use both hemispheres, but there seems to be a natural mental leaning toward one or the other…”. That’s unsubstantiated. Here’s a simple test, how do you measure if someone is right brained or left brained? If you say that they are right brained because they are more creative, that’s no different than saying they are more heart-centered because they are more creative, or any other colloquial saying.

I'm not going to go rooting around for articles on this, the claim was, "We all use both hemispheres, but there seems to be a natural mental leaning toward one or the other...". That's unsubstantiated.
Seems to me the article I cited substantiates precisely that. Some people are more comfortable with left-brain functions such as numbers, others are more comfortable with right brain functions such as spatial relations. "Creativity" per se doesn't enter into it. TFS
I'm not going to go rooting around for articles on this, the claim was, "We all use both hemispheres, but there seems to be a natural mental leaning toward one or the other...". That's unsubstantiated.
Seems to me the article I cited substantiates precisely that. Some people are more comfortable with left-brain functions such as numbers, others are more comfortable with right brain functions such as spatial relations. "Creativity" per se doesn't enter into it. TFS I only see a quote, not a citation. Which just says the two hemispheres do different things. So? One's comfort level with numbers is not a function of their "left brainedness", unless you have some other evidence. Otherwise, you're putting two things together with no causal relationship.

Lausten, my quote comes from the same site you cited. I’m not going to do your homework for you; look it up yourself. Don’t be lazy.
You state, “One’s comfort level with numbers is not a function of their “left-brainedness”.” I’d say it’s precisely that. You ask for other evidence, but your statement is merely a bald assertion; where I come from, bald assertions don’t rate as evidence.
Nice try, but you don’t convince me.
TFS

You have the burden of proof and you haven’t defined what you mean. We agree that the two hemispheres do different work or work in different ways or however you want to put it, that’s not in dispute. But does “left-brained” mean, and how do you determine if someone is “left-brained”? I don’t need to convince you of anything, you have to answer those two questions.

I don’t have to answer anything. Give it a rest.
TFS

I don't have to answer anything. Give it a rest. TFS
Of course you don't have to, but not answering leaves open the possibility that you can't. Other than your attempts so far of course.

It’s pretty obvious to me that nothing I, or anyone else, might say, is going to change your mind, since you obviously feel you already have all the answers. You admit that the two brain hemispheres have different functions; you admit that there are people out there who are comfortable with mathematics but less so with imagery, and others who embrace imagery but find mathematics impenetrable; but you say that this doesn’t mean that these people are “left-brained” or “right-brained”. I confess I can’t follow your reasoning here, mainly because I suspect you don’t have any. You ask for evidence, but these are colloquial descriptions, not scientific propositions; “evidence” in such cases simply doesn’t exist; all you have is opinion. You’re arguing about semantics, not science. I suspect you wouldn’t recognise a scientific argument if you fell over one in the street.
TFS

It's pretty obvious to me that nothing I, or anyone else, might say, is going to change your mind, since you obviously feel you already have all the answers. You admit that the two brain hemispheres have different functions; you admit that there are people out there who are comfortable with mathematics but less so with imagery, and others who embrace imagery but find mathematics impenetrable; but you say that this doesn't mean that these people are "left-brained" or "right-brained". I confess I can't follow your reasoning here, mainly because I suspect you don't have any. You ask for evidence, but these are colloquial descriptions, not scientific propositions; "evidence" in such cases simply doesn't exist; all you have is opinion. You're arguing about semantics, not science. I suspect you wouldn't recognise a scientific argument if you fell over one in the street. TFS
Now, wait a minute. What did you just do there? I never said I have all the answers, I supplied references for why I think what I do. What system of verification of a definition are you using? Yes, I asked for evidence, isn't that how it's supposed to work? Do I hear you right that YOU are saying these are not scientific propositions? Why didn't you just say that? But then you get slippery and say all I have is opinion. It's not an opinion to say that I haven't seen scientific evidence for something, it's a statement about me. All you need to do is show me the evidence, or you can say you weren't speaking scientifically. That's not semantics, that's definitions. But then you end with this not recognizing a scientific argument thing. So, do you have a scientific argument or not? Or is "people out there feeling comfortable" what you call science?