[extropy-chat] "Dead Time" of the Brain.

[A B]

Hi Heartland,
   
  I didn't mean to upset you. Believe me, I understand how it feels to present a strange or counter-intuitive argument. When many people begin to analyze or criticize your argument simultaneously, it can give you a feeling of being hounded or attacked. But, for your part, when you present an idea that goes against the grain, especially to a strongly science oriented group, you should *expect* a great deal of fine scrutiny. I expect the same thing for my very strange argument, and in fact I encourage it. The more constructive criticism I receive the better - it will either lead to a strengthening of my case or a weakening. If mine is an idea that should die, I'll let it die. I've largely refrained from any personal attacks, but I've tried to have a little fun with you on occasion. I'm sorry, if it led to a bad impression.
   
  Regarding the: ... you will die when you die ... comment. For the record, I didn't put it in quotations, and I didn't mean to imply those were your words. I expected anyone interested who read it, also read the full original. I think John was making a direct quotation of my summary and was not implying a quotation by you.
   
  Best Wishes,
   
  Jeffrey Herrlich  

Heartland <velvet977 at hotmail.com> wrote:
  >A B (Jeffrey Herrlich) Wrote:
>
>> Hi Heartland,
>> Saying that you will die when you die doesn't really explain anything.

Clark:
> Yes, "you die when you die" really doesn't cut it, I had a similar problem
> with Heartland so he expanded on his answer and explained that the original
> is the original and the copy is the copy. In the post after that he told me
> that A is A and B is B. I still wasn't quite convinced he was right but then
> in yet another post said F is F and G is G, and suddenly it all clicked.


Hey, I'm doing my best. I have no control over how people interpret my answers or 
if they understand what I'm saying. If I had an hour of face time with someone who 
*thinks* he's got a good argument against mine I could probably convince him, 
assuming I would be dealing with a rational person.

I didn't say that "you die when you die." Why would you put your interpretation in 
quotes and imply that this is what I said? But you, Mr. Clark, haven't played fair 
from the beginning (insults, straw man after straw man) so why should you change 
your tactic now? I didn't expect anything else.

But, generally, I'm disappointed that I have to spell each detail of an idea to 
have any hope that an idea will be understood. What happened to taking a principle 
and extrapolating it to its logical conclusion? Instance is not a type. Activity is 
not information. Mind is not a brain. Would it be really so evil if I asked you or 
anyone else to think about these principles for a week, month or a year before 
challenging the conclusions that logically derive from these principles?

S.

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060505/a8adcafd/attachment.html>