Ellie:
>I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the split is good. I mean
>that some scientists are so wrapped up in specialization that they are
>unwilling to correlate their work with other disciplines, like looking
>for validation in science for instinctive wisdom, which is what I have
>tried to do. As you say, I am looking for a reality check in science for
>the wisdom on instinctive living in the area of emotions. By "split" I
>only mean that they look at their own viewpoint and separate it, i.e. not
>correlate it with other views to arrive at the truth. I consider the
>split is a result of their autistic like behavior, narrow focus, that it.

Ah, I see! We are in agreement. I was using the "split" as the split
between conscious and unconscious, between the cerebral and the instinct.
In that sense, science is a product of the cortex and is IMO a good/useful
result of the split between cortex and instinct. The split has caused may
troubles, but is also the source of much human glory and accomplishment.

Cheers,
Kirt