Hank wrote:
> Since he (Michael S.) obviously has not learned much, except that he can
> continue to provoke some of us, why do we keep spending time
> responding to
> his queeries (the misspelling is intentional!)? I hate us to
> take a hiatus
> from Michael S., but that's what I'm proposing. How's them apples?
Actually, while most of Michael's posts are pointless and certainly don't
represent either science or psychology in any meaningful manner, at the
same time some aspects of them _do_ merit discussion, albeit from a more
rational perspective.
His "marriage sabbatical" is a good example. In itself, his concept is
absurd but the root question of whether a separation from one's spouse has
positive or negative consequences for a relationship is both a valid one
and one very appropriate to TIPS. His Egyptian post would have had equal
merit for discussion (not, of course, from the perspective he intended)
had he taken the time to do his homework about Egypt and state his
historical facts with some accuracy.
I suspect if Michael would let go of his non-Eurocentric prejudices and
allow himself to acknowledge that many primitive societies do NOT have
anything of value to contribute to academia (a society that brutally
butchers its people, for example, really doesn't have anything of value or
relevance to contribute to the teaching of "mental health"), he would
probably contribute some rather interesting and thought provoking posts.
Rick
--
Rick Adams
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love
you leave behind when you're gone. --Fred Small, Everything Possible "
