Macuilxochitl's Comments

Comment Wall (109 comments)

At 10:06pm on June 5, 2012, 3lisabeth said…: Hello Marco, thanks for the add....seems i am picking all my friends from the chat box :D But i can get a better feel for the person when i read what they have to say ....Thanks!

At 1:53pm on June 4, 2012, Athena said…: Hallo Marco! :)

Sorry, dass ich später antworte. Zu Deiner Frage nach dem Blutspenden, habe ich meinen ersten Termin Samstag. Aber da es mein erstes Mal ist, muss ich erst sämtliche Fragebogen ausfüllen. Ich HOFFE sie lassen mich zu.

At 7:24pm on May 30, 2012, Perry Fullerton said…: "Team whole foods" - love that! Thanks brother!

At 5:06am on May 29, 2012, Fredric Sjöberg said…: Hi :-)

I'm doing great! And you? :-D

At 2:39pm on April 28, 2012, pradtf said…: interesting - received no email about this last comment. i think there is a ning problem.

i haven't heard much bach vocal at all ... though i've heard plenty of handel because my wife sings them.

btw, you said you like seeing music to video, so you may enjoy fantasia. there is a bach fugue in there among many other things. may be you've seen it already.

in friendship,

prad

At 7:38am on April 28, 2012, Molly Sky said…: Hahaa, you didn't go over the top with the spanish! Pero no, no te preocupes, todavía estoy aquí. He estado muy ocupado así que no he estado en el Internet mucho. Jaja no creo que ustedes son personas malas! :P

At 4:17am on April 23, 2012, pradtf said…: yes this is very nice! they do say that when the angels play for god they play bach, but when they play for themselves, they play mozart ... and that is when god most likes to listen in ;)

in friendship,

prad

At 5:39am on April 22, 2012, pradtf said…: you mean what they have on the video?

in friendship,

prad

At 4:40am on April 22, 2012, pradtf said…: i don't know. was the short guy the happiest? possibly people who accuse you of not getting it, are worried about their height? :D

i don't see why that bach piece made you weep, but then since i don't, possibly i don't understand.

i do want to study bach more - i have schweitzer's excellent 2 volumes on him! but i haven't gotten around to reading them beyond the first few chapters. :(

in friendship,

prad

At 1:05pm on April 21, 2012, pradtf said…: i could say "I'll let you figure it out on your own", but i won't even though i just did! :D

there seems to be some peculiar attachment given to how tall one is that gets resolved somehow at 6'. one of the illusions seems to be that 6' is correct for this person because the person is 6'.

what do you think?

is 'what is' what 'should be'?

or is what 'should be' something that should become 'what is'?

in friendship,

prad

At 12:05pm on April 21, 2012, pradtf said…: it's cute. seems to be obsessed with height and illusion though.

in friendship,

prad

At 11:36am on April 21, 2012, Greenmama said…: Hey Marco, thanks for the great question. What I am doing is making something called a needs guess or an empathy guess. This has an incredibly soothing effect on the brain. Try it on yourself sometime when you are feeling stressed or upset. Actually it feels wonderful to use with good feelings, too! Here is a list of universal human needs that can help. http://www.cnvc.org/Training/needs-inventory

If you are still feeling stressed and upset after you make a needs guess, that just means that you need more needs to be named. The nice things about making these guesses is that even if you are "wrong" your guess helps the person clarify what her needs are... meaning basically you have the same effect as guessing "right."

To answer your question about what comes next... well, the person typically feels calmer and the prefrontal cortex comes on line, and usually she has more clarity about what she wants. Having the prefrontal cortex online means you can now feel empathy for others, you can start brainstorming possible actions, you can more easily connect with intuition... in essence, you feel empowered.

At 10:37am on April 20, 2012, pradtf said…: you can argue that chomsky attempted to make things more 'scientific' with his UG etc, but his ideas are not universally accepted (even though they changed much in the field). so while, i'm sure there are some linguists who take a 'scientific' approach, to put linguistics into the category of a science is stretching things. that's why for instance, MIT and others puts social sciences in with humanities and arts.

however, i will examine things further when i get back to the course.

in friendship,

prad

At 9:22am on April 20, 2012, pradtf said…: you can call it a social science or even a 'soft' science if you wish.

however, the principles and methodologies are somewhat different.

in friendship,

prad

At 4:35am on April 20, 2012, pradtf said…: we do things differently in english because it's a weird language.

it's not so much that social sciences are dismissed, it's more that they aren't sciences.

linguistics isn't a science in the same sense that physics, chemistry, biology etc are because much of it doesn't utilize the scientific method. it not so much a discovery of the laws of nature, but an application of what some people think should be applied - that's why you can keep changing the rules. you can't do that in the sciences, though you can improve the approximations progressively.

in friendship,

prad