User talk:Peter Scott Norris

Welcome
Dear Mildly Mad

Further, just realized how technical Wiki is and how simple I am. The spirit of what I said is still good.

Peter ````

Hi Mildly,

As to your warning that Wikipedia doesn’t accept text that isn’t footnoted-sourced-zuper-technical, I’m proposing something else - for ordinary people, who can’t be bothered with the academic approach (they’re not Aspis, like us). I’m really serious about keeping text short, simple, clear, and precise.

I’ll be driving my WEOK Project for now. But I like your thinking, and ask you to help with its Personal Evolution section.

You may use any of my text in your work on BASIC HUMAN.

Thanks,

Peter Norris Peter Scott Norris (talk) 05:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm interested in creating an entry called BASIC HUMAN. It would be cross-referenced in all articles that deal with human motives, perception, actions, conflicts, etc.

It would speak from a severely reductionist perspective (to counter the atomization-branching that is so prevalent in modern times. This flood of detail (synonyms) makes it too hard for ordinary people to understand themselves and each other.

The entry would begin with the premise that all advanced animals, including humans, are APPROACH (PLEASURE)-AVOIDANCE (PAIN) machines. In plain language, we're machines that are dominated by WANTING and NOT WANTING, the PRIMARY EMOTIONS.

One section would focus on the evolved neurological structures of the Human Brain, particularly the Lymbic System and Cerebral Cortex.

Another section would discuss the SECONDARY EMOTIONS and show how they are derived from the primary emotions. For instance, FEAR and ANGER would be listed as secondary emotions derived from the primary emotion of AVOIDANCE/PAIN/NOT WANTING. JEALOUSY would be defined as FEAR of losing someone-something, which is the same as NOT WANTING to lose something.

Another section would focus on the Diagnostic Statistics Manual, reducing its countless types of normal and abnormal human behavior to a manageable set of categories. In particular, ANXIETY would be defined as SIMULTANEOUS WANTING AND NOT WANTING of something, resulting in confusion, stress, indecision, and derivative mental states, including asexuality, hypersexuality, and homosexuality.

I'll be back; just wanted to get started. Peter Scott Norris (talk) 06:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi there, welcome to Wikipedia! It looks like a lot of this information is already in the Human article, particularly the Psychology subsection and its sub-articles, Motivation and Emotion--perhaps you could start by contributing to those articles!  Also, this sounds like it might be original ideas that you came up with on your own, so please remember that Wikipedia does not publish original research--it has to be corroborated by a reliable source before it is added here.  Please let me know if you have any questions, and again, Welcome!  Thanks, Mildly MadTC 15:05, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Reference Desks
Hi Peter Scott Norris. I just removed this edit of yours to the Science Reference desk WP:RDS, as I don't believe that you intended it as a science question for the reference desk. Please forgive me if I was mistaken. If you have a question about the working of the reference desk, then you can ask it on the reference desk's discussion page at WT:RD. In this case, perhaps I can help you. You asked "Reference Desk hit me with something about singularities, out of the blue. What’s up? Why?" I see that there was a question WP:RDS immediately preceding your post, but I don't understand what you mean by being "hit" by the reference desk. If you answer here I will respond to you, or if you wish to address the reference desk editors in general about the workings of the desk, then you can repost you question at WT:RD.

Welcome back to Wikipedia! Don't forget to sign your posts on talk pages or the reference desk (but not the body of regular articles) with four tildes ( ~ ). They will automatically be replaced by your user name with links and time and date. -- ToE 09:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The End Of Knowledge


The article The End Of Knowledge has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Completely original research and written like an essay.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ RobTalk 01:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey Peter Scott Norris. I was just checking back here (to see if you had responded about my request for clarification about your reference desk question) when I saw this deletion notice, so I checked out your new article.  Based on what I see, it will certainly be deleted (either through the proposed deletion process or through the full blown articles for deletion process) because it represents original research, which is not what Wikipedia is for.  You may wish read about this under WP:NOTESSAY, a section of the more general WP:What Wikipedia is not.  There are lots of places on the web for personal essays, but Wikipedia is not one of them.  Cheers! -- ToE 02:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)