Re: Asifism
Bruno Marchal skrev: Le 04-juin-07, 14:10, Torgny Tholerus a crit : Pain is the same thing as the pain center in the brain being stimulated. If you are really unconscious or not conscious, you could say this, indeed, but I hardly believe you are unconscious. In the best case your theory will work for you and other "zombie". It cannot work for those who admit the 1/3 distinction or the mind/body apparent distinction. You are on the fringe of being an eliminativist philosopher. What I do appreciate is that you offer your theory for yourself. Let me ask you explicitly this question, which I admit is admittedly weird to ask to a zombie, but: do you think *we* are conscious? I am constructed in such a way (my brain connections is such that...) I very strongly claim that I am conscious, I very strongly claim that I have feelings, I very strongly claim that I have a mind, I very strongly claim that I have perceptions. But I know (intellectually) that I am wrong, and I know why I am wrong. When I look at you (in 3rd person view), I see that you are constructed in exactly the same way as I am. So I know why you say that you are conscious. I know nothing sure about you, but the most probable conclusion is that you are equally unconscious as I am. What is the philosophical term for persons like me, that totally deny the existence of the consciousness? (I also deny the existence of infinity...) -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
On 6/7/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is the philosophical term for persons like me, that totally deny the existence of the consciousness? (I also deny the existence of infinity...) Um, refreshingly rational? Pleasingly parsimonious? :-) - Jef --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Hello, like I said before you are just turning the meaning of consciousness to mean whatever you think you're not. Knowing something implies consciousness, if you're not conscious, you can't know anything. Quentin On Thursday 07 June 2007 15:47:35 Torgny Tholerus wrote: Bruno Marchal skrev: Le 04-juin-07, à 14:10, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : Pain is the same thing as the pain center in the brain being stimulated. If you are really unconscious or not conscious, you could say this, indeed, but I hardly believe you are unconscious. In the best case your theory will work for you and other zombie. It cannot work for those who admit the 1/3 distinction or the mind/body apparent distinction. You are on the fringe of being an eliminativist philosopher. What I do appreciate is that you offer your theory for yourself. Let me ask you explicitly this question, which I admit is admittedly weird to ask to a zombie, but: do you think *we* are conscious? I am constructed in such a way (my brain connections is such that...) I very strongly claim that I am conscious, I very strongly claim that I have feelings, I very strongly claim that I have a mind, I very strongly claim that I have perceptions. But I know (intellectually) that I am wrong, and I know why I am wrong. When I look at you (in 3rd person view), I see that you are constructed in exactly the same way as I am. So I know why you say that you are conscious. I know nothing sure about you, but the most probable conclusion is that you are equally unconscious as I am. What is the philosophical term for persons like me, that totally deny the existence of the consciousness? (I also deny the existence of infinity...) -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
As we said it in Hungary: let the 'bartender' talk into it... * I feel it is a vague metaphor to have 'brain centers stimulated'- HOW? - as persuaded them to do something? There are physiologic activities translated (somewhere, somehow) into mental events and so far we know(?) about electric connections. But wait: before I try to express my ignorance of what (how) to identify as consciousness (even, maybe 'conscious') - Galvani's frog legs were not attached to the braincells and reacted to the 'pain' of the electric shock. That goes back a step from crying 'OUCH' upon an electric shock. So, while I do not deny the role of the 'pain centers', I cannot assign their exclusivity in the process either. My view is complexity of which both brain tissues, functions, mentality and the ambiance of the body (human etc. 'live' beings) is interactively involved - and we are pretty far from understanding HOW and: What else? We are not singularities, not our mind, not our body - which could be envisioned (I didn't even dare say: understood) independently by themselves. Not even in THEIR (separated) interaction. Whatever we find is useful, unless we consider it as ALL of it. * I like Bruno's hint(?) about 'ethics' - I never had a reasonable idea what may work in it, unless I identified it with the 'culture-related' morality. I still question the sole effect of such ethics upon myself,. it would be a very selfish ethics. May it be extended to include pain-centers' stimulus of 3rd persons??? * Torgny wrote: If you are really unconscious or not conscious, you could say this, indeed, but I hardly believe you are unconscious As that arbitrary approach to consciousness goes in my mind (I consider it a historical noumenon applied bt diverse authors to fit their theory) it includes a mental side: awareness and direction of the body, response to information we get. Total 'unconsciousness' is death. In anesthetic one still controls not even the smooth muscles, but reflexes as well and a lot more. Other things may be suspended (as on vacation), e.g. memory. When I woke up after appendectomy I continued tp be angry: I argued angrily FOR being put out instead of a local anesthetics. 'Conscious also has levels, some within full awareness, some (partly?) hidden, yet within the active mentality effects. We use these words as they 'fit' what we want to express (as all others). The yearly Tucsan Int'l. Conferences on 'Consciousness' (I follow them since 1991) still could not agree in definitions. To the question: do you think *we* are conscious? my unsolicited answer is: we can write defkinitions by which yes and ofher definitions by which no and don't forget the intermedietes. * Bruno mixes acting with feeling. Actors 'feel' the paycheck and play - as if. No fMRI involved for the role they simulate by the outside visible. Even 'good actors' go on;y as far as the secondary phenomena of their role-playing are involved. No actor died by the character's heart attack. Only if they had their own - personal, not acted - illness. I was an actor in my last job when the international management made - in my scientific thinking - 'bad' decisions: I complied and had the next paycheck in mind, reminding myself that I don't 'own' the company. Did not 'fire' myself. * I still want to make some appreciative remarks to the asifism, but this one goes to Bruno's post. John M On 6/6/07, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Le 04-juin-07, à 14:10, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : Bruno Marchal skrev: Le 01-juin-07, à 18:47, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : When I am tortured, my pain center in my brain will be stimulated. This will cause me to try to avoid this situation (being tortured). One (good) way to archive this is to start talking about ethics. If I can make other human beings to believe that it is ethically wrong to torture objects, that behave as if they were conscious, then the probability that somebody will torture me decreases. But if me is not conscious, why should us try to diminish that probability? My brain is constructed in such a way, that if my pain center is stimulated, then I will not repeat those action that caused the pain center to be stimulated. (And if my lust center is stimulated, then I will repeat those actions that caused my lust center to be stimulated.) My neurons in my brain are interconnected in such a way, causing this behavoiur. All right. This is all ethics is about: Trying to avoid stimulating the pain center in our brains. Could pain exist without consciousness? Do you agree that the sensation of pain is different from acting like if having that sensation of pain? If not movie actors would complain! Pain is the same thing as the pain center in the brain being stimulated. If you are really unconscious or not conscious, you could say this, indeed, but I hardly believe you are unconscious. In the best case your theory will work for you and
Re: Asifism
Bruno Marchal skrev: Le 01-juin-07, 18:47, Torgny Tholerus a crit : When I am tortured, my pain center in my brain will be stimulated. This will cause me to try to avoid this situation (being tortured). One (good) way to archive this is to start talking about "ethics". If I can make other human beings to "believe" that it is ethically wrong to torture objects, that behave as if they were conscious, then the probability that somebody will torture me decreases. But if "me" is not conscious, why should us try to diminish that probability? My brain is constructed in such a way, that if my pain center is stimulated, then I will not repeat those action that caused the pain center to be stimulated. (And if my lust center is stimulated, then I will repeat those actions that caused my lust center to be stimulated.) My neurons in my brain are interconnected in such a way, causing this behavoiur. This is all ethics is about: Trying to avoid stimulating the pain center in our brains. Could pain exist without consciousness? Do you agree that the sensation of pain is different from acting like if having that sensation of pain? If not movie actors would complain! Pain is the same thing as the pain center in the brain being stimulated. When movie actors behave as if they were feeling pain, then it is not pain, because their pain center in their brains are not being stimulated. Only their outer behaviour is the same, inside their brains there will be different. -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Le 01-juin-07, à 18:47, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : Bruno Marchal skrev: One more question: supposing you are correct, is it ethically wrong to torture you? Is it ethically wrong to torture an entity without consciousness (supposing we could be sure of that) even if it acts like it was conscious? This is an interesting question. And the answer is: When I am tortured, my pain center in my brain will be stimulated. This will cause me to try to avoid this situation (being tortured). One (good) way to archive this is to start talking about ethics. If I can make other human beings to believe that it is ethically wrong to torture objects, that behave as if they were conscious, then the probability that somebody will torture me decreases. But if me is not conscious, why should us try to diminish that probability? This is all ethics is about: Trying to avoid stimulating the pain center in our brains. Could pain exist without consciousness? Do you agree that the sensation of pain is different from acting like if having that sensation of pain? If not movie actors would complain! By the way, are you more sure about proton than about your belief in proton? What would that mean? I look at myself in the third person view. I then see a lot of protons reacting with eachother, and I see how they explain my behavior and the words I produce. I see how they cause me saying I am conscious! I have a free will! I am happy!. This is all that is. This explains everything. Assuming materialism it could explain everything describable at the third person. Assuming comp, it cannot even explain neutron, which is most probably a first person plural construct (not a human one, but I guess a lobian one: it is far more general). If you assume eliminativist materialism, then you would be right in case you are indeed a zombie, something which, frankly, I doubt. Self-referentially correct machines disagree with you, they can already distinguish first person and third person notions and other nuances. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Hi, I'd say that I'm more sure of my own existence than anything else. Even if consciousness is an illusion, this illusion still is and need explanation... This illusion ask question about herself I can hear my thought, saying the're not real will not make them disappear. Quentin On Friday 01 June 2007 14:35:23 Torgny Tholerus wrote: I am unconscious. I have no mind. I have no feelings. I have no perceptions. I am not thinking. I am just a machine that claims that I am conscious. The only thing that happens is a lot of chemical reactions in my brain. (Or rather, there are a lot of mathematical relations...) I just behave AS IF I am conscious. If you interview me, I will answer that I am conscious. I will strongly claim that I am thinking, and that is the only thing I am really sure of. But that is a lie. The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
On Jun 1, 2007, at 6:53 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: I assure you, at least one entity in the universe is conscious: me. If evolution could have made me a zombie, it would have. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that evolution couldn't help but grant me consciousness as a side-effect or epiphenomenon, the real prize being intelligent behaviour. snip I'm with Dennett too, and I'll bring up the point he made about this epiphenomenon view of consciousness that keeps cropping up. The point is that whatever consciousness is, it cannot be epiphenomenal in the philosophical sense of having no physical effects. I'll put it this way: your hands and fingers are physical objects. When they move, that is a physical event. Whatever causes them to move, is also a physical event. When you type the words I am conscious, that is also a physical event. If you think that your consciousness is epiphenomenal, you must believe that your being conscious has nothing whatever to do with your typing the words I am conscious. It's just a coincidence! The same goes for whatever makes you say I am conscious. If you really think consciousness is epiphenomenal, you must endorse something like this: I know I'm conscious (for whatever reason). And, for some totally unrelated reasons having nothing whatever to do with the fact that I'm conscious, I also say that I'm conscious. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
On 01/06/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am unconscious. I have no mind. I have no feelings. I have no perceptions. I am not thinking. I am just a machine that claims that I am conscious. The only thing that happens is a lot of chemical reactions in my brain. (Or rather, there are a lot of mathematical relations...) I just behave AS IF I am conscious. If you interview me, I will answer that I am conscious. I will strongly claim that I am thinking, and that is the only thing I am really sure of. But that is a lie. The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Stathis Papaioannou skrev: On 01/06/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? It did got away without it... ;-) -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
On 01/06/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stathis Papaioannou skrev: On 01/06/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? It did got away without it... ;-) I assure you, at least one entity in the universe is conscious: me. If evolution could have made me a zombie, it would have. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that evolution couldn't help but grant me consciousness as a side-effect or epiphenomenon, the real prize being intelligent behaviour. There are some philosophers (eg. Daniel Dennett) who would argue that consciousness is *nothing but* this intelligent behaviour, and the idea of a zombie is logically incoherent, but I'm not entirely convinced that this is right. -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Torgny: [[cute]] SAIS W H O I found Stathis' reply before I read your tirade. I agree and add: I think you 'are' a typical 'voter'. (in the political sense). Have a life! John M On 6/1/07, Torgny Tholerus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am unconscious. I have no mind. I have no feelings. I have no perceptions. I am not thinking. I am just a machine that claims that I am conscious. The only thing that happens is a lot of chemical reactions in my brain. (Or rather, there are a lot of mathematical relations...) I just behave AS IF I am conscious. If you interview me, I will answer that I am conscious. I will strongly claim that I am thinking, and that is the only thing I am really sure of. But that is a lie. The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. -- Torgny Tholerus - --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Le 01-juin-07, à 14:35, Torgny Tholerus a écrit : I am unconscious. I have no mind. I have no feelings. I have no perceptions. I am not thinking. I am just a machine that claims that I am conscious. The only thing that happens is a lot of chemical reactions in my brain. (Or rather, there are a lot of mathematical relations...) I just behave AS IF I am conscious. If you interview me, I will answer that I am conscious. I will strongly claim that I am thinking, and that is the only thing I am really sure of. But that is a lie. If you are unconscious, you should have said that it is WRONG, not that it is a lie. That would contradict your unconsciousness. By saying lie you did betray your consciousness, imo. Also, by saying I am not conscious, are you sure that you behave like if you were conscious? The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. Are you *sure*? By the way, are you more sure about proton than about your belief in proton? What would that mean? I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. OK, but this rise the question: why? Another question: if consciousness does not exist, what do you mean by behaving AS IF I am conscious? (but thanks you for actually saying this only about yourself and not us :) One more question: supposing you are correct, is it ethically wrong to torture you? Is it ethically wrong to torture an entity without consciousness (supposing we could be sure of that) even if it acts like it was conscious? Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Bruno Marchal skrev: One more question: supposing you are correct, is it ethically wrong to torture you? Is it ethically wrong to torture an entity without consciousness (supposing we could be sure of that) even if it acts like it was conscious? This is an interesting question. And the answer is: When I am tortured, my pain center in my brain will be stimulated. This will cause me to try to avoid this situation (being tortured). One (good) way to archive this is to start talking about ethics. If I can make other human beings to believe that it is ethically wrong to torture objects, that behave as if they were conscious, then the probability that somebody will torture me decreases. This is all ethics is about: Trying to avoid stimulating the pain center in our brains. -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Bruno Marchal skrev: Le 01-juin-07, 14:35, Torgny Tholerus a crit : The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. Are you *sure*? By the way, are you more sure about proton than about your belief in proton? What would that mean? I look at myself in the third person view. I then see a lot of protons reacting with eachother, and I see how they explain my behavior and the words I produce. I see how they cause me saying "I am conscious! I have a free will! I am happy!". This is all that is. This explains everything. -- Torgny Tholerus --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 01/06/07, *Torgny Tholerus* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am unconscious. I have no mind. I have no feelings. I have no perceptions. I am not thinking. I am just a machine that claims that I am conscious. The only thing that happens is a lot of chemical reactions in my brain. (Or rather, there are a lot of mathematical relations...) I just behave AS IF I am conscious. If you interview me, I will answer that I am conscious. I will strongly claim that I am thinking, and that is the only thing I am really sure of. But that is a lie. The only thing that exists is a lot of protons, neutrons, and electrons reacting with each other inside my brain. I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? -- Stathis Papaioannou How do you know it was trouble - maybe it's a probable spandrel, or maybe it's even a necessary effect. Brent Meeker --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On 01/06/07, *Torgny Tholerus* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stathis Papaioannou skrev: On 01/06/07, *Torgny Tholerus* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I behave AS IF I am conscious because the natural selection has favored that type of behavior. Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? It did got away without it... ;-) I assure you, at least one entity in the universe is conscious: me. If evolution could have made me a zombie, it would have. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that evolution couldn't help but grant me consciousness as a side-effect or epiphenomenon, the real prize being intelligent behaviour. There are some philosophers (eg. Daniel Dennett) who would argue that consciousness is *nothing but* this intelligent behaviour, and the idea of a zombie is logically incoherent, but I'm not entirely convinced that this is right. -- Stathis Papaioannou I'm with Dennett, except that I think logic is to weak a tool to rule out zombies. It would require proving a contradiction from X acts like a conscious human and X is not conscious. But all you really need is to show it's nomologically impossible - i.e. would imply a violation of presumed scientific knowledge. I think that may be possible. Brent Meeker --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Asifism
On 02/06/07, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which implies you really are conscious, because otherwise why would evolution have gone to the trouble of making *me* conscious if it could have got away without it? -- Stathis Papaioannou How do you know it was trouble - maybe it's a probable spandrel, or maybe it's even a necessary effect. That was the point I was trying to make: if it was any trouble, we wouldn't have it. So it probably is a spandrel or necessary side-effect of conscious-like behaviour. -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
