&&&&&&&below

Natalia

All mail scanned by NAV
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Christoph Reuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Re: Projection makes perception


The art of flip-flopping à la Natalia:

> | > But you haven't actually delved into psychology, and are rushing to
> | > bring in "help" by citing expert opinions
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> | Nonsense.  I cited experts because you wanted to dismiss my position as
> | an exotic/layman view.
>
> $$$$$$ Not one expert was mentioned.
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It's really pointless to discuss on this flip-flop basis.  Anyway,
in citing the literature's criticism of Freud vs. cocaine, it is
not necessary to mention individual experts, especially when the
most relevant writings are in German -- for an interesting summary,
see  http://www.sgipt.org/th_schul/pa/gesch/kokain.htm

&&&& When you claim to have cited experts, then do so at the time of the claim. 
My remark to you pertained to your inability to explain why you professed that 
Freud's theories on the subconscious were not a significant contribution to 
psychology. Citing outside opinions should be accompanied by same if it's all 
you've got to go on, apart from emotion.&&&& 


> but leave that for when, if ever, you decide to pursue psychology at
> least at the level of dilettente$$$$$

I'd suggest you learn to spell dilettante before emitting further
dilettantish (or Freudian) psycho-babble -- and no, I have NOT "often
declared that psychology is psycho babble", but your school of psychology
is. 

&&&&&& I concede. I mis-spelled a word. At least I know the meaning of it. 
&&&&&& You have often declared that psychology is psycho-babble. The last time 
was when you used it to debunk the "all-or-none" syndrome. The terminology has 
nothing to do with "my" school of psychology, for I have not devised one, and 
Freud, who you seem to consider my authority, has but some basic theories that 
hold water with me. And all-or-none is not from Freud either. My books are 
packed, so I can't cite the author. &&&&&&
 
 From someone who even advised friends into death from drugs, and who
continued heavy smoking even after having his jaw removed due to cancer,
you really can't expect any sane position on drugs, illegal or not.

&&&&&& Perhaps if you rewrote the above it would not be up to interpretation. 
Are you saying that it is unlikely to expect a sane position from you on drugs 
because you partook in them to your detriment, and advised to the detriment of 
others their use of them? Or are you talking about another friend? &&&&&

Consistently, you have no solution whatsoever to offer, only aggravation
(also literally).  A waste of time.
&&&&&&You are the one who is supposed to have answers you haven't yet 
shared.Nor do you ever respond to my very relevant questions. 
&&&&&& Debating is a waste of time, but exchange never is. I am not the one who 
claimed to have sweeping solutions for the world addiction issues, apart from 
addressing the root cause of violence/depression/oppression. I made the 
suggestion that keeping pot smokers out of jails would leave room for hard 
criminals such as murderers, rapists and abusers. These regularly released 
repeat offenders cost the system and society far more than any pot smoking kid. 
But media and politics have rather forgotten about these chiefly because of US 
government war on drugs, which may also support the projection theory: they try 
to round up pot smokers and growers because they are financing their secretive 
little war departments by its illegal sales themselves. If I'm wrong on that 
one, I'll be very surprised given that it is on record that the CIA escorted 
drug-laden boats into New York City harbour. Given that somehow these top 
secret departments are miraculously being financed to the tune !
 of trillions of dollars, and given that the US Army can misplace 3.3 trillion 
dollars without an investigation, you can be sure that their funds are illegal 
as hell. &&&&&&

&&&&&Natalia&&&&

Just saying no,
Chris




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword
"igve".



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework




_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to