Most textbooks (for example: Neuroscience, by Dale Purves and colleagues) describes referred pain from visceral nociceptors as caused by synapsing of the afferent nociceptive signals on secondary afferents shares with cutaneous nociceptive signals.
I'm wondering then: Why does this only work one...
I have seen a lot of artists use a graphics tablets while drawing/painting on a computer. I tried drawing on a computer using a mouse, and its worse than what I can draw on paper with a pencil (I'm very bad at art). Let alone drawing, writing is also very tough with a mouse. Why is it that way? I...
@StevenJeuris Thank you for drawing attention to it. Initially I argued that scope (and site name) were not as important given we had issues with quality and self-help. But I am starting to believe that we are reaching a consensus there, and we can start to move on to other topics
However, we must make the final decisions soon. My motivation to close questionable questions and finding reasons why it may be too broad/opinion based, is starting to drain. We need the "quality close-vote reason" quickly to make that process easier.
Then we can close that chapter and together move forward on the scope and attracting experts
You argued that we need the old people to make that final decision so, can we start calling them in?
This is a first step into an attempted reboot of this community: Rebooting Cognitive Sciences: a Suggested Approach
As messy as meta is, through an organized community effort I'm hoping to collect and structure the key issues which have been plaguing this site over the years, as well as constr...
We first still need to (1) finish review is almost done, but we first need to (2) collect concrete proposals as well.
In particular, we need a post that outlines several proposals in regards to question expertise. What is expected, what is insufficient. I would expect around 4 different proposals, ranging from 'all inclusive' to 'expert only'.
Also, thank you for moving the student post. I did seem to have misclassified that one.
I think your summary that our scope is pretty much in line with the wikipedia article is fair enough. I do not see where you got some of the points listed from though. I do not recall 'methodology' ever being discussed explicitely on meta. Kind of trivial to see it would be welcome. Also am missing the overlap with bio.
It seems that rather than a list of mentioned problems, you wrote it as a suggestion of what it should be?
(which is fine, but I intended that to be step 2 of the process ;p) Preferably in a separate post.
Yeah, i bases the summary on the (short) list at hand and, because of its length added methodology explicitly, because it could, in a way, be related to programming of experiments e.g.
This is a first step into an attempted reboot of this community: Rebooting Cognitive Sciences: a Suggested Approach
As messy as meta is, through an organized community effort I'm hoping to collect and structure the key issues which have been plaguing this site over the years, as well as constr...
The Axon Terminal
The Axon Terminal