----- Original Message ----- From: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences digest" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 25, 2004 12:00 AM > TIPS Digest for Friday, December 24, 2004. > > Subject: Re: Chomsky (was "Brain Pick" Re: tips digest: December 23, 2004 > From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:53:46 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 3 > > Mike, > > This has gotten far too involved for the teaching list.
I tend to agree but probably for different reasons. Remember that this thread was initiated by statements of concern regarding how "hard" or "sensitive" one should be in "interrogating" colleagues/students in public presentations, especially since some people (apparently, mostly students) thought that their professsors were being too tough or rude in their "grilling". The professors did not think that they were being too tough or rude in their questioining/point-making. Clearly, there was/is a difference in how the students and professors viewed their actions, with one implied conclusion being that as students develop more experience in research (including initiating, maintaining, completing, analyzing, and presenting) they will better understand and appreciate what their professors had done and why. I stepped into this thread essentially to provide a couple of personal examples of where it was clear that the people involved clearly crossed lines of decorum, some social, others possibly scientific. I used Chomsky and one of his colleagues because I had direct experiences with them in situations where it was apparent to me (and probably others) that they really were being rude and "over the top" in making something that was supposed to approximate a scientific presentation. I'd like to point out that I am not unique in having this type of experience with Chomsky or his colleagues -- Randy Allen Harris' book "The Linguistics Wars" helps to document situations where Chomsky & Co exhibited their "wrath" to their "detractors" (dare I say also towards those they considered their "intellectual lessers"?) as well as towards each other as their theoretical perspectives evolved and diverged. One doesn't have to rely upon either my account or Harris' account: I am sure that there are many people who can provide additional accounts about Chomsky & Co's antics. My main point, however, is that if one wants to show students examples of what really rude and unreasonable behavior is like, Chomsky & Co provide more than a few relevant examples (indeed, the brief quote I provided from p72-73 in Harris' book provides a good starting point for a discussion of when and how one has crossed the line from tough questioning and point-making into intellectual thuggery). Also, I don't mean to "pick" on Chomsky & Co because of who they are and because I experienced some of their harshness, I selected them as examples because their "excesses" were so public (almost as though they were trying to "brand" a style of scientific discourse). I have heard psychophysicists refer to the research of other psychophysicist as "not being science" (indeed, not just research but the entire theoretical framework was "garbage" and the wrong way to go about conducting science) and I've heard one world famous psychopharmacologist completely dismiss the published results of a particular researcher, saying that he "didn't believe that the results were true" and that he didn't trust the researcher (the person making this claim didn't provide any justification for it but, given his power and status, no one would question him about it). However, these comments/statements were uttered in private research meetings where the audience was very limited and with the implicit understanding that "really stupid stuff" that might be said in such meetings stayed in the room or could only be discussed with the people directly involved (at least that was my understanding). Chomsky & Co did their thing in public and it was difficult not to be aware of what they were saying and doing. Again, back to the main point, it might be helpful for students to see clear examples of where one has "Professors Behaving Badly" as well as commentary and explication on why there's "bad behavior". Again, I recommend that people read Harris' book, Reber's 1987 "Synthese" article, and other sources to make up their minds about these issues regarding Chomsky & Co. -Mike Palij New York University [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Allow me to > respond briefly to just a couple of your points. > > Mike Palij wrote: > > >> (especially with some psychologists who sometimes seem to > >> revel in making whole careers, sometimes whole subdiciplines, out of > >> opposing their own misinterpretations of his position). > > > > > > Perhaps you're referring to Skinner here? I don't really know. > > I do know that Skinner has said that Chomsky didn't understand > > his "Verbal Behavior". > > No, I meant cetain cognitive psychologists and psychlinguistis. > > > > > > >> I've never hear > >> him be downright, unprovokedly rude in the way you've described. > > > > > > Perhaps he was having a bad day that day. Or maybe he thought > > that because it was mostly a lay audience ...that it wasn't > > necessary for him to "detail" or "highlight" his objections to the then > > contemporary cognitive psychology, especially semantic memory > > research > > To be honest, I would have much the same reaction to a question about > "semantic memory" (as I understand the phrase) in the midst of a > discussion about of our knowledge about the *structure* of language. I > do not say this lightly. I was trained in cognitive at U. Toronto by > people, among others, like Tulving, Craik, and Lockhart. Knowelge of > linguistic structure was not a topic much their minds. Perhaps "trivial" > wasn't quite right the right word, but "not germane" might be. I > suppose it depends on the context. > > >> All I meant was that I took a strongly nativist position > >> on language > > > > I see, thanks for the clarification. My confusion arises because Chomsky > > is usually identified as being a very specific type of "nativist", namely > > one that argues that language abilities are represented as specific > > capabilities > > that are modular/independent from other cognitive processes (i.e., the > > "language organ"). > > Of course. > > >> As for Randy Allen Harris' book, I enjoyed it and learned a great deal > >> from it as well, but what I took away from it was that Chomsky has > >> usually acted far more reasonably (not to mention rationally) than those > >> who have been aligned against him. > > > > > > I find this statement to be extremely interesting. It's been a while since > > I read Harris' book but my memory is that Chomsky continued to > > emphasize the central role of syntax in his theories while his students > > and colleagues, such as Paul Postal, James McCauley, George and > > Robin Lakoff, among others, focused more on the role of semantics > > in understanding how sentences/utterances are formed, helping to > > give rise to "Generative Semantics" and other theoretical perspectives > > Yes, (I haven't read it for a while either and so might misremember) but > the outcome was that the generative semantics program failed and Chomsky > modified his position to correct the problemtic areas that had led them > to attempt it in the first place. I don't know what's happened to Postal > and McCauley. George Lakoff has spun off essentially into the position > that there can't be a formal theory of language (and that making grand > political pronouncements is much more fun). Chomsky, I believe, has said > that he doesn't think George ever really understood the theory to begin > with. > > Regards, > -- > Christopher D. Green > Department of Psychology > York University > Toronto, Ontario, Canada > M3J 1P3 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164 > fax: 416-736-5814 > http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ > ============================ > . > > > --------------020402090205020302080801 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> > <title></title> > </head> > <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff"> > Mike,<br> > <br> > This has gotten far too involved for the teaching list. Allow me to > respond briefly to just a couple of your points.<br> > <br> > Mike Palij wrote:<br> > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED] stburg.edu"> > <blockquote type="cite">(especially with some psychologists who > sometimes seem to<br> > revel in making whole careers, sometimes whole subdiciplines, out of<br> > opposing their own misinterpretations of his position).<br> > </blockquote> > <!----><br> > Perhaps you're referring to Skinner here? I don't really know.<br> > I do know that Skinner has said that Chomsky didn't understand<br> > his "Verbal Behavior".</blockquote> > No, I meant cetain cognitive psychologists and psychlinguistis.<br> > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED] stburg.edu"><br> > <br> > <blockquote type="cite">I've never hear<br> > him be downright, unprovokedly rude in the way you've described.<br> > </blockquote> > <!----><br> > Perhaps he was having a bad day that day. Or maybe he thought<br> > that because it was mostly a lay audience ...that it wasn't<br> > necessary for him to "detail" or "highlight" his objections to the then<br> > contemporary cognitive psychology, especially semantic memory<br> > research </blockquote> > To be honest, I would have much the same reaction to a question about > "semantic memory" (as I understand the phrase) in the midst of a > discussion about of our knowledge about the *structure* of language. I > do not say this lightly. I was trained in cognitive at U. Toronto by > people, among others, like Tulving, Craik, and Lockhart. Knowelge of > linguistic structure was not a topic much their minds. Perhaps > "trivial" wasn't quite right the right word, but "not germane" might > be. I suppose it depends on the context.<br> > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED] stburg.edu"> > <blockquote type="cite">All I meant was that I took a strongly > nativist position<br> > on language <br> > </blockquote> > <!---->I see, thanks for the clarification. My confusion arises because > Chomsky<br> > is usually identified as being a very specific type of "nativist", > namely<br> > one that argues that language abilities are represented as specific > capabilities<br> > that are modular/independent from other cognitive processes (i.e., the<br> > "language organ"). </blockquote> > Of course. <br> > <br> > <blockquote type="cite" > cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED] stburg.edu"> > <blockquote type="cite">As for Randy Allen Harris' book, I enjoyed it > and learned a great deal<br> > from it as well, but what I took away from it was that Chomsky has<br> > usually acted far more reasonably (not to mention rationally) than those<br> > who have been aligned against him.<br> > </blockquote> > <!----><br> > I find this statement to be extremely interesting. It's been a while > since<br> > I read Harris' book but my memory is that Chomsky continued to<br> > emphasize the central role of syntax in his theories while his students<br> > and colleagues, such as Paul Postal, James McCauley, George and<br> > Robin Lakoff, among others, focused more on the role of semantics<br> > in understanding how sentences/utterances are formed, helping to<br> > give rise to "Generative Semantics" and other theoretical perspectives</blockquote> > Yes, (I haven't read it for a while either and so might misremember) > but the outcome was that the generative semantics program failed and > Chomsky modified his position to correct the problemtic areas that had > led them to attempt it in the first place. I don't know what's happened > to Postal and McCauley. George Lakoff has spun off essentially into the > position that there can't be a formal theory of language (and that > making grand political pronouncements is much more fun). Chomsky, I > believe, has said that he doesn't think George ever really understood > the theory to begin with. <br> > <br> > Regards,<br> > <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > Christopher D. Green<br> > Department of Psychology<br> > York University<br> > Toronto, Ontario, Canada<br> > M3J 1P3 > <br> > e-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a><br> > phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164<br> > fax: 416-736-5814 <br> > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.yorku.ca/christo/";>http://www.yorku.ca/christo/</a><br> > ============================<br> > . > <p></p> > </div> > --- <BR> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] <BR> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] </BODY> > </html> > > --------------020402090205020302080801-- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: RE: Chomsky (was "Brain Pick" Re: tips digest: December 23, 2004 > From: "DeVolder Carol L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:27:40 -0600 > X-Message-Number: 4 > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E9D5.C6EABA77 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > =20 > Actually, I've been enjoying this thread a great deal and learning quite = > a bit from it. Thank you to all of you with your terrific posts. > Carol > =20 > -------- > From Christopher Green: > =20 > Mike, > > This has gotten far too involved for the teaching list. Allow me to = > respond briefly to just a couple of your points. > > > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E9D5.C6EABA77 > Content-Type: application/ms-tnef; > name="winmail.dat" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > > eJ8+Ii0QAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy > b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEgAEAQQAAAFJFOiBDaG9tc2t5ICh3YXMg > IkJyYWluIFBpY2siIFJlOiB0aXBzIGRpZ2VzdDogRGVjZW1iZXIgMjMsIDIwMDQA8hMBBYADAA4A > AADUBwwAGAAKABsAKAAFAFEBASCAAwAOAAAA1AcMABgACgAdACwABQBXAQEJgAEAIQAAADE0OTc4 > QjREOTdFQzE4NEZBMEVCOEVGMzUyQ0JFOTBGAHAHAQOQBgAQCwAANwAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AO9W > 7XzV6cQBHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAACAUcAAQAAADsAAABjPXVzO2E9IDtwPUZpcnN0IE9y > Z2FuaXphdGk7bD1TQVVFWEJFMS0wNDEyMjQxNjI5NDRaLTMxNzk0AAAeAEkAAQAAAEEAAABSZTog > Q2hvbXNreSAod2FzICJCcmFpbiBQaWNrIiBSZTogdGlwcyBkaWdlc3Q6IERlY2VtYmVyIDIzLCAy > MDA0AAAAAEAATgAAIS/A0OnEAR4AWgABAAAAFQAAAENocmlzdG9waGVyIEQuIEdyZWVuAAAAAAIB > WwABAAAAQwAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAENocmlzdG9waGVyIEQuIEdyZWVuAFNN > VFAAY2hyaXN0b0B5b3JrdS5jYQAAAgFcAAEAAAAWAAAAU01UUDpDSFJJU1RPQFlPUktVLkNBAAAA > HgBdAAEAAAAVAAAAQ2hyaXN0b3BoZXIgRC4gR3JlZW4AAAAAAgFeAAEAAABDAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+ > oxAZnW4A3QEPVAIAAAAAQ2hyaXN0b3BoZXIgRC4gR3JlZW4AU01UUABjaHJpc3RvQHlvcmt1LmNh > AAACAV8AAQAAABYAAABTTVRQOkNIUklTVE9AWU9SS1UuQ0EAAAAeAGYAAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAA > AB4AZwABAAAAEQAAAGNocmlzdG9AeW9ya3UuY2EAAAAAHgBoAAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAGkA > AQAAABEAAABjaHJpc3RvQHlvcmt1LmNhAAAAAB4AcAABAAAAPQAAAENob21za3kgKHdhcyAiQnJh > aW4gUGljayIgUmU6IHRpcHMgZGlnZXN0OiBEZWNlbWJlciAyMywgMjAwNAAAAAACAXEAAQAAABsA > AAABxOnQ4abzOUZFnSFKZpHR89ZuynifAAEm0VcAHgB0AAEAAAAnAAAAVGVhY2hpbmcgaW4gdGhl > IFBzeWNob2xvZ2ljYWwgU2NpZW5jZXMAAB4AGgwBAAAAEQAAAERlVm9sZGVyIENhcm9sIEwAAAAA > HgAdDgEAAAA9AAAAQ2hvbXNreSAod2FzICJCcmFpbiBQaWNrIiBSZTogdGlwcyBkaWdlc3Q6IERl > Y2VtYmVyIDIzLCAyMDA0AAAAAAIBCRABAAAAgwMAAH8DAADbCgAATFpGdWq2F64DAAoAcmNwZzEy > NYIyA0NodG1sMQMwPwEDAfcKgAKkA+MCAGNowQrAc2V0MCAHEwKA/xADAFAEVghVB7IR1Q5RAwHd > ENcyBgAGwxHVMwRGENlvEusR4wjvCfc7GM8OMDU7EdIMYGMAUAsJAWQzNpMRYAulNCAQAipcDrID > AZAOEDkgPEhUTXxMPhHjHecU8AqjHwwz4x2AHqBFQUQe/Q7xIB8FDhA2DvA8TUVUQQUHsEEkQD0i > R0VOgEVSQVRPUiIS0WsCMAnwdCTQTQ3gA2BzEm8BgCBEHrIgRWQ0aXQLgGclkwNgbCInIb8izx5R > NzcekFRJaFRMRR7+NA7wKE04+jUekC8qzyj/HgUsES1gFyF/H88eFDURYDxCTxxEWTCtHPExz2c5 > NnEekERJVjCgHfMAISDPAAA2RRFgHck2NDYvNzIFHas4HYAmbmJzcOMCgDhXXCdhAUA27x5BvwHA > OEcKojhHCnEdrDAhQf4vNew+GB2cNF81bzZ/N48hRI5BY3R1B0BseQAsIEkndmUgYkUJ4SAJ8Gpv > eSdydA5oBABJYRjQYWQgYXogCcFhBUABAAdASiBunUoQbEnwBKAncnF1J1CvSHBKMC9MQnViJ1Ag > A1IiICdQLiBUEQBua2wgeQhgSWBvSiBH8CB/JpBOwwPwSXBOwgXAJdByEwaBDeAgcCZwdHMu/zx/ > PY8+nz+vQL9Bz0LfQ+/3RP9GD1oHQwrABvBRj1Kf/1OvVL9Vz1bfV+9Y/1oPWx//YZ86HzsvPD9d > 317vX/9hD79iH2MvZD9lT2Zfc1stdkX/ax9sL20/bk9vX3BvcX9yj9dzn3Svf0dGTfJDSdAEAKlP > EHBoEzFHCdI6ds//d99473n/ew98H30vfj9/T/+AX4f/aL9pz2rfhD+FT4Zf/4dviH+Jj4qfi6+M > v5m7JjC4a2UsHawj8DMBUpkp9FxsC4BlCoGWD51/no+fmiROcEmREQAEIGdvAkC9SLFmCsFPEE8g > C4B2BvD/SGBKEAIQUHGCwFCBANBJgK8ngZ7wUUBOUEFH8G8H4P9MX5eiB4BPAhjQj8ACIEoQmmII > gWZIAE8CanVRQPtKIQWgdQtQSHBPhAXAUSD/C4BRUZ//oQ+fHJF/ko+Tn++Ur5W/ls8yDTgtUTMv > MX+/tuUqkTBQHs8hILdVfbqgAB4ANRABAAAAQgAAADw2MDFBRDFDODk5QTNCNjQyQTk3MkRFOUE0 > QURDOUFFRDBCMUNEN0BzYXVleGJlMS5hbWJyb3NlLnNhdS5lZHU+AAAAHgBHEAEAAAAPAAAAbWVz > c2FnZS9yZmM4MjIAAAsA8hABAAAAHwDzEAEAAACeAAAAUgBFACUAMwBBACAAQwBoAG8AbQBzAGsA > eQAgACgAdwBhAHMAIAAlADIAMgBCAHIAYQBpAG4AIABQAGkAYwBrACUAMgAyACAAUgBlACUAMwBB > ACAAdABpAHAAcwAgAGQAaQBnAGUAcwB0ACUAMwBBACAARABlAGMAZQBtAGIAZQByACAAMgAzACwA > IAAyADAAMAA0AC4ARQBNAEwAAAAAAAsA9hAAAAAAQAAHMO9W7XzV6cQBQAAIMNUc7cbV6cQBAwDe > P69vAAADAPE/CQQAAB4A+D8BAAAAEQAAAERlVm9sZGVyIENhcm9sIEwAAAAAAgH5PwEAAABwAAAA > AAAAANynQMjAQhAatLkIACsv4YIBAAAAAAAAAC9PPUZJUlNUIE9SR0FOSVpBVElPTi9PVT1GSVJT > VCBBRE1JTklTVFJBVElWRSBHUk9VUC9DTj1SRUNJUElFTlRTL0NOPURFVk9MREVSQ0FST0xMAB4A > +j8BAAAAFQAAAFN5c3RlbSBBZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yAAAAAAIB+z8BAAAAHgAAAAAAAADcp0DIwEIQ > GrS5CAArL+GCAQAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAwD9P+QEAAADABlAAAAAAAMAGkAAAAAAAwAdQAAAAAADAB5A > AAAAAB4AMEABAAAADwAAAERFVk9MREVSQ0FST0xMAAAeADFAAQAAAA8AAABERVZPTERFUkNBUk9M > TAAAHgAyQAEAAAARAAAAY2hyaXN0b0B5b3JrdS5jYQAAAAAeADNAAQAAABEAAABjaHJpc3RvQHlv > cmt1LmNhAAAAAB4AOEABAAAADwAAAERFVk9MREVSQ0FST0xMAAAeADlAAQAAAAIAAAAuAAAAAwB2 > QP////8LACkAAAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAGEBIyeRYDAAcQ8QAAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAEAAAAeAAgQ > AQAAAGUAAABBQ1RVQUxMWSxJVkVCRUVORU5KT1lJTkdUSElTVEhSRUFEQUdSRUFUREVBTEFORExF > QVJOSU5HUVVJVEVBQklURlJPTUlUVEhBTktZT1VUT0FMTE9GWU9VV0lUSFlPVVJURVJSAAAAAAIB > fwABAAAAQgAAADw2MDFBRDFDODk5QTNCNjQyQTk3MkRFOUE0QURDOUFFRDBCMUNEN0BzYXVleGJl > MS5hbWJyb3NlLnNhdS5lZHU+AAAA0es= > > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E9D5.C6EABA77-- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: Chomsky (was "Brain Pick" Re: tips digest: December 23, 2004 > From: David Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:06:55 -0800 > X-Message-Number: 5 > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --------------070703000401040302000501 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I'll second that. If you go off-line with your discussion, you deprive > the rest of us from a learning opportunity (I didn't know half that > stuff about Chomsky). Stay public by all means and get as "involved" as > you want. We know how to use the "delete" key if we don't want to stay > with you. > --Dave > > DeVolder Carol L wrote: > > > > >Actually, I've been enjoying this thread a great deal and learning quite a bit from it. Thank you to all of you with your terrific posts. > >Carol > > > >-------- > >>From Christopher Green: > > > >Mike, > > > >This has gotten far too involved for the teaching list. Allow me to respond briefly to just a couple of your points. > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > > -- > ___________________________________________________________________ > > David E. Campbell, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Department of Psychology Phone: 707-826-3721 > Humboldt State University FAX: 707-826-4993 > Arcata, CA 95521-8299 www.humboldt.edu/~campbell/psyc.htm > <http://www.humboldt.edu/%7Ecampbell/psyc.htm> > > > --------------070703000401040302000501 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> > <title></title> > </head> > <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> > I'll second that. If you go off-line with your discussion, you deprive > the rest of us from a learning opportunity (I didn't know half that > stuff about Chomsky). Stay public by all means and get as "involved" > as you want. We know how to use the "delete" key if we don't want to > stay with you.<br> > --Dave<br> > <br> > DeVolder Carol L wrote: > <blockquote > cite="[EMAIL PROTECTED] rostburg.edu" > type="cite"> > <pre wrap=""> > Actually, I've been enjoying this thread a great deal and learning quite a bit from it. Thank you to all of you with your terrific posts. > Carol > > -------- > >From Christopher Green: > > Mike, > > This has gotten far too involved for the teaching list. Allow me to respond briefly to just a couple of your points. > > </pre> > <pre wrap=""> > <hr size="4" width="90%"> > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED] n.frostburg.edu</a> > </pre> > </blockquote> > <br> > <div class="moz-signature">-- <br> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; "> > <meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"> > <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 9"> > <meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 9"> > <link rel="File-List" href="./Signature_files/filelist.xml"> > <title>-- </title> > <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> > <o:DocumentProperties> > <o:Author>Olivia Campbell</o:Author> > <o:Template>Normal</o:Template> > <o:LastAuthor>Olivia Campbell</o:LastAuthor> > <o:Revision>1</o:Revision> > <o:TotalTime>1</o:TotalTime> > <o:Created>2004-01-24T00:46:00Z</o:Created> > <o:LastSaved>2004-01-24T00:47:00Z</o:LastSaved> > <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> > <o:Company>Humboldt State University</o:Company> > <o:Lines>1</o:Lines> > <o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs> > <o:Version>9.2720</o:Version> > </o:DocumentProperties> > </xml><![endif]--> > <style> > <!-- > /* Style Definitions */ > p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal > {mso-style-parent:""; > margin:0in; > margin-bottom:.0001pt; > mso-pagination:widow-orphan; > font-size:12.0pt; > font-family:"Times New Roman"; > mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} > a:link, span.MsoHyperlink > {color:blue; > text-decoration:underline; > text-underline:single;} > a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed > {color:purple; > text-decoration:underline; > text-underline:single;} > span.moz-txt-tag > {mso-style-name:moz-txt-tag;} > @page Section1 > {size:8.5in 11.0in; > margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; > mso-header-margin:.5in; > mso-footer-margin:.5in; > mso-paper-source:0;} > div.Section1 > {page:Section1;} > --> > </style> > <div class="Section1"> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="moz-txt-tag">-- </span><br> > ___________________________________________________________________ <br> > <br> > David E. Campbell, Ph.D. <a href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a> > <br> > Department of Psychology Phone: > 707-826-3721 <br> > Humboldt State University FAX: > 707-826-4993 <br> > Arcata, CA > 95521-8299 <a > href="http://www.humboldt.edu/%7Ecampbell/psyc.htm";>www.humboldt.edu/~campbe ll/psyc.htm</a></p> > </div> > </div> > --- <BR> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] <BR> To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] </BODY> > </html> > > --------------070703000401040302000501-- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: The will to live > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 16:20:53 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 6 > > On 24 Dec 2004 at 7:43, Miguel Roig wrote: > > > The Wednesday edition of the NY Times had an interesting short piece > > about the popular belief that folks that are dying tend to do so > > around significant personal dates or holidays. <snip> > > >> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/national/22holiday.html > > The article, which generally debunks this claim, notes a contrary > result: > > "In a study of older Jewish men, Dr. Phillips found a 25 percent dip > in deaths from all causes just before Passover, and a 25 percent > increase in the week or so after". > > In other words, eating matzoh can kill! Does the FDA know about this? > > (The primary study mentioned seems to be more evidence against the > widely-held pernicious idea that you are responsible for your own > illness, that you can defeat cancer by having the right attitude.) > > Stephen > ___________________________________________________ > Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 > Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 > Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 > Canada > > Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy > TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at > http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips > _______________________________________________ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Re: The will to live > From: Paul Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:11:13 -0600 > X-Message-Number: 7 > > At 4:20 PM -0500 12/24/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >On 24 Dec 2004 at 7:43, Miguel Roig wrote: > > > >> The Wednesday edition of the NY Times had an interesting short piece > >> about the popular belief that folks that are dying tend to do so > >> around significant personal dates or holidays. <snip> > > > >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/national/22holiday.html > > > >The article, which generally debunks this claim, notes a contrary > >result: > > > >"In a study of older Jewish men, Dr. Phillips found a 25 percent dip > >in deaths from all causes just before Passover, and a 25 percent > >increase in the week or so after". > > > >In other words, eating matzoh can kill! Does the FDA know about this? > > Actually, I'd blame it on the Manischewitz. > Five glasses of that could kill a horse! > Particularly when it's used to chase down horseradish. > -- > * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > * Psychology Department 507-389-6217 * > * 23 Armstrong Hall Minnesota State University, Mankato * > * http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html * > > > > --- > > END OF DIGEST > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
