----- Original Message ---- From: Philip Pilkington <pilkingtonphil at gmail.com>
If, on the other hand, you argue that "emotional make-ups" are historically determined then they cannot be pre-rational as they must be founded on some sort of linguistic/cultural input. Linguistic/cultural inputs cannot be
[WS:] Is both socially constructed and neurologically influenced - both types of influence interact (cf. neuroplasticity.) What I am saying is that science, as any other form of culture, is ultimately a product of human brain, and as such is influenced by balance of chemical reactions in that brain (i.e. affects or emotions as in "emotional intelligence" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence), the impact of the environment - both "natural" and "cultural" - on that brain, as welss as sets of human conventions (aka "culture.") These types of influences are basiclly historical coincidences in the sense that they are prodcuts of specific sets of circumstances existing in specific time periods.
I would not consider such a view "deterministic" because this concept itself is amibiguous and carries a heavy emotive baggage - as in "ordained by a superior power" or "independent of human will" both implying religious mythology. I prefer the term "contingent" on a particular set of circumstances.
Wojtek