Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1
From: David Longley (David_at_longley.demon.co.uk)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Previous message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 19:09:26 +0100
In article <ci4l0602r3b@drn.newsguy.com>, Daryl McCullough
<daryl@atc-nycorp.com> writes
>David Longley says...
>
>>I have provided plenty of straight answers.
>
>I don't think you have. But if you really think that there is nothing
>left to discuss about the subject, then why do you participate in a
>discussion group? Either discuss or go away.
>
>--
>Daryl McCullough
>Ithaca, NY
>
As I've just said, *you* are the one who is ignoring what's been said.
-- David Longley
- Next message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Previous message: David Longley: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Next in thread: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Challenge to the behaviourists, #1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
