I need you to replace the existing content with this content:
The subject/Title:
Does a baby who enters the world have a worldview?
Body of the text:
The baby’s first worldviews:
There is a common assumption that, at birth and afterward, the baby has only feelings and needs, and that his worldview begins to form only at a much later stage.
I argue that the baby already has a worldview at birth.
Feelings and needs exist, but it would be a mistake to describe early life as consisting solely of them.
The difficulty in recognizing that the baby has a worldview stems from an incorrect definition of the term “worldview”.
The baby’s first worldview stems from the brain structure he is born with, which determines his initial reactions to sensory information.
I.e., even his first instinctive reactions are not random but result from his worldview.
The development of his second worldview:
After the beginning of his exposure to the world, his worldview, which had developed passively, further evolved into a pre-conceptual, experiential-structural perception.
At this stage (which begins at birth), his worldview is not replaced, but is gradually expanded through the addition of making connections (which are made according to the structure of his brain) between the following elements:
Proximity, distance, intensity, relief, continuity, disruption, response, and lack of response.
These are the elements that his subconscious uses to “understand” what is happening around him (the world to which he is exposed).
Understanding at this stage is simply a more efficient cataloging of information in his subconscious, allowing him to respond to sensory input in a more contextual way.
As a result, a pattern is created in which he actively draws conclusions about how the world works; that is, he develops an improved worldview in a “proactive” way, though it is also unconscious.
You can either post to the existing topic or start a new one. Starting a new topic doesn’t seem justified if it’s about the same thing, but it’ll probably be ok with the mods.
In any case, nobody would have read an updated OP.
So It’s called a “reply.”
Why do you call it something else?
Why are you making me do something you can’t approve?
As a “reply,” no one will see it unless they go into the specific “reply” in the thread.
This means that anyone who just looks at the list of “topics” will not see the correct topic that I want to post.
You wrote that there is not much difference between them.
That is not true.
Check how many responses to my topic match what I submitted to post but didn’t approve - and you will see that what you allowed me to post and what you did not allow are two different things.
