Actually (says my just-3-yr.-old grandson at the beginning of many of his
sentences), I agree with Rick that, over the past four or five years, that
a few M.S.-based discussions have been interesting and informative.
However, I believe that they have generated far more heat than light (
and maybe, with the soaring cost of heating fuel, some of us prefer heat).
To me, it's like playing the lottery. Do you want to invest valuable
resources on the extremely rare chance that you might strike it rich?
For those who have queried me about my use of the word "queerie", I have
composed a little poem:
After Shabbos, my kosher canary
Will be telling you what is a queerie.
(It's a kind of strange question my dearie.
Oy! I'm deep in the depths of despairie.)
Warmest Regards,
Hank
=======================================================================
Hank Goldstein, Ph.D. | PHONE: (319) 588-6305
Department of Psychology | FAX: (319) 588-6789
Clarke College | EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dubuque, IA 52001 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can always spot a well-informed person; her/his views are the
same as yours."
Ilka Chase [paraphrased]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Rick Adams wrote:
> 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 "
>
>
