On 22 Oct 2015, at 08:06, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/21/2015 8:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 21 Oct 2015, at 00:59, Brent Meeker wrote:
A strange, and sad, case. But Facilitated Communication would
seem to be a corollary of Bruno's idea that conscious persons are
"out there" in platonia and just need the proper physics in order
to interact with us.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/magazine/the-strange-case-of-anna-stubblefield.html?_r=0
It vindicates also the idea that nobody is stupid. Some have just
have communication problem, when it is not the listener who is the
one with the reception problem.
That's a very beautiful paper Brent. I like how it illustrates many
difficulties, notably the principle of less dangerous consequence
(to bet that something/someone is conscious is less dangerous than
to bet it is not, as their falsities leads to different harms. But
in the case of someone disabled, it can be dangerous for the one
applying it.
It can make you suspect of felony and send you in jail.
Very sad story, but it is hard to condemn the judge, as such abuse
exists, and the "facilitated communication", even if genuine in
some cases, might not be in every case,
And I'd say not in this case.
I have some doubt too.
Romantic love always involves some projection of a lover's ideals
onto the loved one. This just seems to be an extreme case. That
only Anna was able to facilitate DJ's communication,
Well, her mother seems to hve been able too, and someone else, but
they all are "facilited communication professional", knowing Anna,
making them suspicious too. It is rather obvious more evidences are
needed. She should have made video, so we might judge better the
amount of help.
that DJ wrote very literate, even erudite, love letters to Anna,
that he did not seem to recognize or acknowledge her in court all
indicates to me the that the "communication" was Anna's invention.
Quite probable.
She was obviously an emotionally unstable person. Even if DJ had
been fully functional, handsome, and smart would it be sensible for
Anna to offer to sign in blood that she would leave her husband and
children and marry DJ?
Not really.
so there are no simple way to resolve the case, and it will be the
judge's personal conviction which should prevail, I guess.
In this case, if the account is correct, I would side with Anna and
D.J, though. She is sent to jail, which is sad enough, but D.J. is
sent back into being considered as a vegetable, which is sad and a
bit frightening.
I think it is a ridiculous injustice that Anna was sent to prison
for more that a few months. So far as I can tell she didn't harm
anyone but herself. DJ did have the intellectual capacity to
appreciate sex nor to be psychologically harmed by it.
In the series DEADLY woman I mad myself the reflection that there are
many obvious case (to me at least) that the person should be handled
by a psychiatric institute instead of prison and/or death row.
That might be a problem with the US.
(Now, some Asylum can be worst than some prison, so ...).
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
