From: D.M. Procida on
Richard Tobin <richard(a)cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> >`In psychology, bicameralism is a hypothesis which argues that the human
> >brain once assumed a state known as a bicameral mind in which cognitive
> >functions are divided between one part of the brain which appears to be
> >"speaking", and a second part which listens and obeys.'
>
> >- it's a psychological hypothesis from a professional psychologist.
> >Which means it's almost certainly total bollocks.
>
> Quite possible, but it's really rather interesting bollocks.

What's wrong with the word 'wrong'?

The vast majority of theories are wrong, have been, and will always be.
It's in the nature of humanity's attempts to understand the world that
theories will get there slowly and be full of mistakes.

I haven't opened any science texts that say: phlogiston theory:
bollocks; the ether: bollocks; plenism: bollocks.

I had a student years ago. We were discussing Descartes' remarks on how
we know that a stick in a body of water is straight even though it
appears otherwise (Descartes thinks that our ability to work this out
shows that knowledge depends on reason rather than the senses).

"This Descartes, right," he said, " - it's just bollocks, innit?"

Perhaps 'bollocks' is the single most widely-used word on the Internet.

Daniele