From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On May 5, 2006, at 1:27 PM, The Fool wrote:
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On May 5, 2006, at 11:52 AM, The Fool wrote:
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, here are a few sites for those curious:
And for the skeptical (I have only
If I remember correctly, at one point St Paul was mistaken for Greek
god or a hero such as Hercules. Obviously, he was a charismatic man
and his presence got misinterpreted by people restricted to a
different culture. He corrected the misapprehension.
But I cannot find the reference and do not
At 09:03 AM Saturday 5/6/2006, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
If I remember correctly, at one point St Paul was mistaken for Greek
god or a hero such as Hercules. Obviously, he was a charismatic man
and his presence got misinterpreted by people restricted to a
different culture. He corrected the
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
On 5/5/06, The Fool wrote:
On 5/5/06, A person not named The Fool wrote:
I see a glaring logical error. The idea that *only* science can
minimize
self-deception and identify non-existent
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of The Fool
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 9:20 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Myers-Briggs
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
If I remember correctly, at one point St Paul was mistaken for
Greek god or a hero such as Hercules.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] reminded me of the New Testament, Acts
14:8 - 18 (KJV), specifically v. 12:
And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he
was the
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fool On
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 5/5/06, The Fool wrote:
On 5/5/06, A person not named The Fool wrote:
I see a glaring logical error. The idea that *only* science
can
minimize
self-deception
If it's science at all, it's a very fluffy kind of science.
Ten or fifteen years ago, I gave Kiersey style Myers-Briggs tests to a
dozen people I knew. I felt the results were accurate in about 7 of
those 12 cases. So I decided it was pretty good for this kind of
topic (and no good at all
From: Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If it's science at all, it's a very fluffy kind of science.
Ten or fifteen years ago, I gave Kiersey style Myers-Briggs tests to
a
dozen people I knew. I felt the results were accurate in about 7 of
those 12 cases. So I decided it was
Nick wrote:
I see a glaring logical error. The idea that *only* science can minimize
self-deception and identify non-existent causes cannot be falsified.
I don't get it, couldn't you falsify the idea by comming up with some
other method that minimizes
self-deception and identifies
10 matches
Mail list logo
