Re: The Hard Problem for Behaviorists

From: patty (pattyNO_at_SPAMicyberspace.net)
Date: 10/09/04 

Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 16:09:56 GMT

David Longley wrote:

> In article <4167f11c$0$44080$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl>, JPL
> Verhey <matterDELminds@hotmail.com> writes
>
>>
>> "David Longley" <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> [..]
>>
>>>> For you to know that it is your limbic system that reflexively forces
>>>> you to endlessly peck the keys of your key board and give all of us
>>>> more
>>>> brain candy, thusly allowing us to be the contingencies that control
>>>> your behavior.. must be a terrible thing to realise for you. No wonder
>>>> you compensate your helplessness and predicament with those desperate
>>>> efforts to control your contingencies by insulting them, ordering them
>>>> to do things differently and "learn" from you, the Mozes begging his
>>>> people to listen and follow the Master to the Promised Land.
>>>>
>>> On the contrary, I am well aware of what you are doing - but clearly
>>> you are not. This is what I'm criticising. It's how people like Ken
>>> Collins behaved. You delude yourself, abuse others, and when
>>> criticised for behaving obnoxiously, just trash the newsgroup because
>>> you can't have your own way with impunity.
>>
>>
>> Sure - you think you know what you talk about and that we don't. You can
>> repeat that as long as you like and I will remind you that what you are
>> doing is a waste of time. And everybody knows that if you were to shut
>> up and go away nothing is lost.
>
>
> I suggest you compare CVs you deluded twit. This is the "Zick-Michaels
> Syndrome". You bury your heads up your rectum, get intoxicated on your
> own emissions, and naturally, reality is kept at bay. Mad alchemist
> Navaga tries to do it by translating good science *back* into folk
> psychology and wonders why he people tell him he's so ineffectual! You
> are behaving like idiots.
>
>>
>> It is you, DL, who drags all those converstations into flaming and mind
>> games. You are the messenger that kills his own message and make other
>> people shun these forums where you spread you fungus behavior.
>>
> Then you might like to look into your history here and why have you
> spent so much time *trying* to follow-up maters that I have been
> referring to. You may not realise it, but that's what you and the other
> nitwits here tend to do. You've doing it now you twit! This is just one
> reason I keep telling you that you don't know what you are talking
> about. You are just "estranged", "alienated", "dissociated" ie unaware
> or ignorant of these contradictory fragments of your behaviour. Look up
> "intensional opacity"
>

To be honest, Verhey, we probably should acknowledge Longley's point
here. He does frequently point us into a body of literature albeit
mostly from the early 20th century. At great deal of this literature
has been glossed over in today's world and perhaps it should not have
been. That Longley does not seem to know how to bring that information
into the 21th century, or to state useful references in today's modern
Internet age; but rather usually just waves at the books on his
bookshelf, should be something that we can overlook. To his credit, he
is improving; but he has a ways to go before his information is as well
presented and is constantly being improved like yours at
<http://home.tiscali.nl/boynalechmipo/>. Actually i suspect that your
ideas there could be better informed by that older body of literature -
but i doubt that Longley will help you with it.

Sigh.

patty