View Single Post
  #43173  
Old 09-08-2015, 05:47 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Posts: XXMVCDLXXX
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
He said there were no similar afferent nerve endings in the eye. He said nothing makes contact with afferent nerves in the eye. He said the eyes are windows for the brain. We're these statements meant to be taken literally?

You said that afferent nerves aren't used to see but rods and cones are used to see. That indicates you do not believe rods and cones to be afferent photoreceptor.
He was very clear when he distinguished between afferent and efferent which you should understand by now. The connection between any external stimuli striking a nerve ending which then sends impulses to the brain for interpretation is the very definition of sense organ. If the brain does not decode the pattern of light which is believed to be responsible for normal sight, then the eyes cannot be called a sense organ.
__________________
https://www.declineandfallofallevil....3-CHAPTERS.pdf

https://www.declineandfallofallevil.com/ebook/


"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.16191 seconds with 10 queries