The Volatility Manifesto

[Oswaldo Costa]

originally posted by Putnam Weekley:
VA is the fear element at an amusement park, or a horror film.

Its value is found in its risk to, and subjugation to, a superseding order.

Basically, it's the devil. And you know how kids these days just love the devil!

Yup, and this sassy devil, misconstrued as a badge of authenticity, is sometimes called "racy acidity," "punk acidity" and "not for the faint of heart."

I'd be fine with trendy young'uns digging VA (after all, I like a pinch of acetic acid in artisanal fruit kombuchas, but those cost $5) if one sensed they could identify it as such, and consciously embraced a flaw as something they enjoy (akin to thinking you deserve to get beat up by your s.o. because you have low self-esteem), but one seldom gets that impression [unless faced with a blast of ethyl acetate (nail salon)].

 

[Ken Schramm]

originally posted by VLM:

originally posted by Brian C:
They are different! When we colloquially use the word "taste" we are referring to how we percieve the combination of these two neural pathways. But there is taste and smell and the two ain't the same. And Mendel worked with peas not beans.

Finally. Olfaction and gustation are different senses. Taste is a sensation of sweet, salt, sour, bitter and maybe umami. Olfaction is everything else (although there are some physical sensations in the nose from some stimuli that may interact with the perception of odor).

Well, taste and olfaction have parallels and differences. All of olfaction occurs though G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Taste is a combination of GPCRs (sweet, bitter, umami), ion channel receptors (sour, salty) and trigeminal sensation for things like ginger and horseradish. The action potentials, transmission pathways and reception centers in the brain are also similar but different. What is clear is that 1) the tongue map is bullshit, and 2) we're not totally clear on how we taste stuff like spices, that do not fall into the "sweet, salty, sour, bitter, umami" pigeon holes. Or why we have GPCRs for thousands of smells but presume we only have them for three categories of taste. What we do know is that sensation thresholds for different ligands cover a huge spectrum among humans - orders of magnitude, and are mostly genetically determined.

Even experts love to think we know almost everything about subjects like this. We don't. We like to say we have five senses; we have many more than that. Balance, proprioception, thermal sensation, tactile wetness, etc. The truth is, we're on the leading edge of ignorance, "same as it ever was."

 

[Jeff Grossman]

Nicely said, Ken.

If you want to get rid of the old tongue map then we will need a new one to take its place. Any suggestions?

 

[robert ames]

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Nicely said, Ken.

If you want to get rid of the old tongue map then we will need a new one to take its place. Any suggestions?

do we?

and if so, perhaps paisley?

 

[Jeff Grossman]

originally posted by robert ames:

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Nicely said, Ken.

If you want to get rid of the old tongue map then we will need a new one to take its place. Any suggestions?

do we?

Yes. People want to talk about taste and they will cling to the old model if you don't put something else in its place.

and if so, perhaps paisley?

Grubs again, grumble grumble.

 

[robert ames]

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:

originally posted by robert ames:

originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
Nicely said, Ken.

If you want to get rid of the old tongue map then we will need a new one to take its place. Any suggestions?

do we?

Yes. People want to talk about taste and they will cling to the old model if you don't put something else in its place.

and if so, perhaps paisley?

Grubs again, grumble grumble.

my point is based on my hunch that, even as the old map is completely bogus, the notion that the tongue can be mapped into regions of taste is equally bogus.

just a hunch. backed by regular consumption of bear whiz beer. remember--it's in the water.

but not based on the pure white light of stupidity.

 

[Jeff Grossman]

originally posted by robert ames:
my point is based on my hunch that, even as the old map is completely bogus, the notion that the tongue can be mapped into regions of taste is equally bogus.

That's fine. I think people can learn a new paradigm. What you cannot do is tell people to stand in a corner and not think about polar bears.

but not based on the pure white light of stupidity.

I am entirely happy with the flashcard section, too.