XPost: sci.psychology.psychotherapy, alt.consciousness, talk.origins
From: RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:48:29 +0000 (UTC), stevefct
wrote:
>Matt Silberstein wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:59:19 +0000 (UTC), farchy@u.washington.edu
>> (Floyd) wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> >Kurt Gödel was born in 1906. By the 1970s, he was in his late 60s or
>> >early 70s. The average life expectancy for someone born in the US in
>> >the early years of the 20th century was a few decades less than that,
>> >and Gödel was born in eastern Europe (then Brünn, Austria-Hungary, now
>> >Brno, Czech Republic) where life expectency was even shorter. Thus he
>> >was quite elderly by the time Rucker met him.
>>
>> Gödel also starved himself to death, it was a long slow processes.
>> Anyone who had met him in those last years would have expected to hear
>> of his death.
>>
>> >Dreaming that an
>> >elderly respected colleague passed away is not all that surprising.
>> >Did Dr. Rucker report dreaming about Gödel any other times? I ask
>> >because it is quite easy to speculate that this is an example of
>> >"counting the hits and forgetting the misses", which is a quite common
>> >phenomenon in psychology (people like John Edward rely on this
>> >phenomenon for their stage shows).
>> >
>> >It also seems curious that you take the account of a young PhD who had
>> >met Gödel once or twice seriously, but neglect any mention of the
>> >experiences of others who were closer to Gödel during life.
>>
>> People who knew Gödel well at that time would have known that he
>> suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. Not a man to take life advice
>> from even if he appeared in a dream.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> --
>> Matt Silberstein
>>
>> Do in order to understand.
>
>
>
>Duh, do you think I believe Godel was giving Rudy life advice?
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo
>oh NOOOOOOO!!!
>
>
>I think Godel was trying to tell Rudy a little about the layers of
>reality. Starting off with the first layer, chess pieces, you know, the
>people we know in life.
So you think that a paranoid schizophrenic, one who starved himself to
death, is a good teach about the layers of reality?
>You figure out the rest. I did.
>
>
>As to Godel being a 'paranoid schizophrenia' ? Hmm, was he really?
He decided that people were poisoning his food so he stopped eating
and so died.
> Just
>because he is wary of most people?
No, because he thought they were trying to kill him. You really ought
to learn something first, then correct.
> I know the stories about being
>poisoned. So we have to conclude because of his condition, if truely
>accessed, he was a unproductive person, someone wrong about his ideas?
For many years he was not productive and his ideas were not rational.
>Someone who ran from his buddies like Rudy and Einstein? Come on, get
>real. What should we think of Einstein who used to take long walks with
>Rudy? Two peas in a pot. Alike?
That was before the full blown paranoia set in.
>Be careful about politically correct labeling. Take profiling. Is it
>always wrong or averse to natural thinking?
>
Huh?
>If I profile a young Arab on a jet as someone more likey More likely to
>blow himself up on a jet than some 80 year old Swedish woman the ACLU
>might jump all over my ass. Why because I'm obviously wrong in my
>thinking, right?
>
>But if I'm vengeful person, crazy, demented, and kidnap the lawyers who
>went after me for my incorrect profiling thinking. And threw them all in
>a specially designed pool. One they had to swim to the other side before
>they drowned.
>
>And the pool was divided in half. One side is filled with dolphins. The
>other side with sharks. And I told them, "you better not make any
>politically incorrect decisions on which side you'll swim through".
>
>And I flip a coin, a fair 50-50 coin, to which side they'll have to
>swim though. No prejudice against sharks. No profiling about any
>animals on any level. Not just about humans.
>
>How many of those lawyers would become politically incorrect to protect
>their asses?
>
>Bad example huh? OK, lets make it more realistic.
>
>You have a bunch of ACLU Jewish lawyer fathers with their daughters
>instead. Having to send their daughters through a side filled with Blood
>gang members. Young black gang members. Or wild rednecks. And the other
>side was filled with priests. Throw some gay ones in for good measures.
>
>Would those Jewish fathers stick to politically correct profiling when
>it might hurt their families. Or just when they're betting/hoping the
>odds are, the hurt will never reach their affluent homes?
>
>Joking. But what do you think?
I think I can understand your inability to recognize schizophrenia.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do in order to understand.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
