Apollo BBS Archive - March 1990

Apollo BBS Archive - March 4 - 6, 1990

Message: 63671
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: James H.
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 00:38:16

Remarkable touch of realism there, James.  Of course, I don't know of any
hotels in Costa Rica with bars on every floor, or suites containing scaled
down palm groves and complimentary strippers either, do you, hmmmmmmmm?
 

Message: 63672
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Whitney Clark/63622
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 00:42:31

I'm pretty sure there were four calling birds, not eleven.

Message: 63673
Author: Silly Putty
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: .
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 04:11:39

Here's a story for ye all, it concerns a man both fat and tall, a far away
princess he did seek, to make this bride his soul to keep, In time she found
him fine and good, he loved her much and she ate food, reading trash and
watching soaps, she tossed out all this man's hopes, yet he did not give her
the dump, in fact he found he liked her plump.
 
Gradually she grew to an enormous size, too big for the average eyes, even
fatter than a mule, she grew too fat for a pool, now this was getting out of
hand, she was taking up too much land! In confusion our man thought, "What
if I had the princess shot?" Then he had his servant buy a gun, he was
looking forward to some fun, A point-blank bullet between the eyes, ended
the cellulite in her thighs, lunch was over for princess chunk, so the
widower threw out all her junk, smiling he found a skinny sexy waif, a
can-a-day and he knew he'd be safe.

Message: 63674
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bobby
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 07:49:43

Where the heck have you been anyway? You've been missed. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 63675
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob on bear
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 07:50:34

I don't know about your bear, but mine was alive. He talked to me too. He
was my true friend. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 63676
Author: $ Melissa Dee
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Camping
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 09:38:13

Hey, it's national camping week.
Go out there and DO Arizona.

Message: 63677
Author: Hans Glans
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 10:03:30

That will take a lot of effort, wouldn't you say?

Message: 63679
Author: $ Shirley Bear
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ANN & BOB/Bears
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 12:06:45

I agree with you Annie.  I collect Bears and they are all alive and talk
to me.   Uh, Yes they do.      So there Bob...
                               ***** Shirley *****
P.S. In fact they (my Bears) are what keep me ?sane!!!!!

Message: 63680
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: JT on Costa Rica
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 14:09:04

Sounds like PJ O'Rourke ...

Message: 63681
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Taranto / 63656
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 22:26:49

Better than you'll ever be
*smirk*

Message: 63682
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Adkins
Date: 03/05/90  Time: 23:34:54

A bar on every floor?  Probably.  Stripers?  Yes.  Complimentary, I doubt
it.  Perhaps I just haven't seen enough.  

Are you sure you're not talking about New Orleans?  

Message: 63683
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Question?
Subject: James H.
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 02:29:15

If I used the term lexiphanic, would it be hypocritical or merely
self-referential?

Message: 63684
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Beau Dog
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 02:34:11

It does a bit, doesn't it?  Would you believe Stanislaw Lem?
 
P.S. Know any good Syrian checkpoint jokes?

Message: 63685
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: (F)ill Command
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 02:58:44

Not very effective: the inappropriate capitals make the secret message
obvious, even though they do not hold the initial positions in each line as
I assume they originally did.
 
BTW, perhaps I have become hopelessly jaded, but I fail to see what's so
shocking about the concealed message.  In fact, it's rather amusing in its
childish way.

Message: 63686
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 03:08:00

Okay... keen eye there Mr Beck.   I have fixed the CAPs.   
        
        The reason is some people find posts like that trashy and are
offended.   There is no reason to have them on the PUBlic board.
        You can't please ALL the people ALL the time.... sigh! (tm)

However, for people that are not offended by such things, we do have the
COSmos SIG where you may express such thoughts....  And Mr Beck, I would be
more then pleased to have you as a $tatus user so you may access that sig
and others.   

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 63687
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Shirley/bears
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 05:16:40

 You keep BEARS? And I used to think that German Shepherds were hard to
clean up after!

Message: 63688
Author: $ Shirley Bear
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul/Bears
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 11:00:47

Yes, Paul, Dear I keep/collect Bears.  Cute little cuddley soft stuffed
Bears and they are no trouble at all.  In fact they are a joy.  And as I
said they keep me ?sane.  You might like to meet my Bears sometime.  You 
might find them a delight to be around they all have their own little 
special look that tells something different about them.   Yes, Paul I
relize that I have no doubt totally lost IT, but remember I have earned
that right.

Catch ya later.
                              ***** Shirley Bear *****

Message: 63689
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Sysop
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 21:32:25

Good point.  There is a place for that sort of stuff, and that place is NOT
the public board. (Gosh, I'm easily manipulated by flattery)
 
Seriously though, this board is private property, and if you feel the need
to prohibit such messages, you'll get no argument from me.  I have found
that you are pretty liberal with the use of tetragrams and even sexually
explicit language, when the message content is not purely frivolous, or
designed primarily to annoy you.  I don't see it as a limit to free speech.

Message: 63690
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: My Dinner with...
Subject: Idiot Savants
Date: 03/06/90  Time: 21:45:48

From real clinical tales from the book "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A
Hat", by Oliver Sacks (Professor of Clinical Neurology at Albert Einstein
College of Medicine):
 
"...But what needs to be stressed -- and this is insufficiently remarked
upon by their studiers, though perfectly obvious to a naive listener
prepared to be amazed -- is the magnitude of the twins' memory, its
apparently limitless extent, and with this the way in which memories are
retrieved.  And if you ask them how they can hold so much in their minds --
a three hundred figure digit, or the trillion events of four decades -- they
say very simply, "We sit it."  And 'seeing' -- 'visualising' -- of
extraordinary intensity, limitless range, and perfect fidelity, seems to be
the key to this.  It seems a native physiological capacity of their
minds . . . But there is no doubt, in my mind at least, that there is
available to the twins a prodigious panorama, a sort of landscape or
physiognomy, of all they have ever heard, or seen, or thought, or done, and
in that blink of an eye, externally obvious as a brief rolling and fixation
of the eyes, they are able (with the mind's eye) to retrieve and see nearly
anything  that lies in this vast landscape . . . A box of matches on their
table fell, and discharged its contents on the floor: "111," they both cried
simultaneously; and then, in a murmur, John said "37".  Michael repeated
this, John said it a third time and stopped.  I counted the matches -- it
took me some time -- and there were 111.

"How could you count the matches so quickly?" I asked.  "We didn't count,"
they said, "We saw the 111" . . . "And why did you murmur '37' and repeat it
three times," I asked the twins.  They said in unison, "'37,37,37,111".
And this, if possible, I found even more puzzling.  That they should see
111-ness in a flash was extraordinary . . . But then they had gone on to
'factor' the number 111 -- without having any method, without even knowing
(in the ordinary way) what factors meant.  Had I already not observed that
they were incapable of the simplest calculations, and didn't "understand"
(or seem to understand) what multiplication or division was?  Yet now,
simultaneously, they had divided a compound number into three equal parts.
"How did you work that out?" I said, rather hotly.  They indicated, as best
they could, in poor, insufficient terms -- but perhaps there are no words to
correspond to such things -- that they did not 'work it out', but just 'saw'
it, in a flash.  John made a gesture with two outstretched fingers and a
thumb, which seemed to indicate that they had spontaneously trisected the
number, or that it came apart of its own accord, into these three equal
parts, by a sort of spontaneous numerical fission.  They seemed surprised at
my surprise -- as if I were somehow blind; and John's gesture conveyed an
extraordinary sense of immediate, felt reality.  Is it possible, I asked
myself, that they can somehow 'see' the properties, not in a conceptual,
abstract way, but as qualities, felt, sensuous, in some immediate, concrete
way?  And not simply isolated quantities -- like 111-ness -- but qualities
of relationship?

"...I thought about the matter, but it hardly bore thinking about.  And then
I forgot it.  Forgot it until a second, spontaneous scene, a magical scene,
which I blundered into, completely by chance..
This second time they were in a corner together, with a mysterious, secret
smile on their faces, a smile I had never seen before, enjoying the strange
pleasure and peace they now seemed to have.  I crept up quietly, so as not
to disturb them.  They seemed to be locked in a singular, purely numerical
converse.  John would say a number -- a six figure number.  Michael would
catch the number, nod, smile and seem to savor it.  Then he, in turn, would
say another six figure number, and now it was John who received, and
appreciatedly it richly.  They looked, at first, like two connoisseurs
wine-tasting, sharing rare tastes, rare appreciations.  I sat still, unseen
by them, mesmerised, bewildered.
What were they doing?  What on earth was going on?  I could make nothing of
it.  It was perhaps a sort of game, but it had a gravity and an intensity, a
sort of serene and meditative and almost holy intensity, which I had never
seen before in any ordinary game before, and which I certainly had never
seen before in the usually agitated and distracted twins.  I contented
myself with writing down the numbers they uttered -- the numbers that
manifestly gave them such delight, and which they 'contemplated', savoured,
shared, in communion.  -to be continued

Message: 63693
Author: Fonda Boyes
Category: Answer!
Subject: larry michaels
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 02:56:53

It seems to me that Mr. Michaels argument regarding value systems and
brainwashing of children is one that is rooted in a person from a strong
christian backround being that they, the christians, are always trying to
pass the responsibility on someone else.  in the most general sense, they
are always blaming satan for all the bad they do. I remember my catholic
school teacher always yelling out loud: "away satan!" for the errors she
made.  another one, sister lucia never admitted to making a mistake. Larry
is basically saying the samething, it isn't his fault for being "what" he
is, it is mommy and daddy's fault.  obviously this creates a vicious circle.
 Larry, can you tell me who brainwashed your mommy and daddy? and so on and
so on and so on.  I empathize with you larry because i once blamed my
parents for making me an idiot but I tried a little excercise which i would
recommend to you:  say to yourself, three times and out loud: "it is my
fault that i am an idiot!"  there is so much to learn from that.  Once, and
you will be able to, accept it you will hopefully recognize who you are and
why you are that person and then try and change yourself rather than sitting
in a cesspool of crap with excuses like "mommy and daddy did it to me" 
Don't be afraid to accept responsibility for your own mistakes, it isn't so
bad.  That not only goes for you but anyone else who uses that manipulative
techniques of claiming; "it's not me!"  I do agree that parents should
accept responsiblity for who their  children are, however, the child (what
you see as a victim) and society also has to accept responsibility as well.
It is society's responsibility to make sure that this "brainwashed" person
doesn't harm anyone else. The child, through education and personal
through education and personal growth will develop their own values.  How
many times did you promise to never hit your kids after mommy and daddy beat
you for doing something wrong? we have all done it and that is how we mold
ourselves therefore if our kids grow up to be problems of society are we
going to let them get away with the argument: "it is my mother and fathers
fault that i am in jail, they never hit me for punishment, harsher
discipline would have made me a better person!"  If you let this sort of
argument permeate your emotional pouch then I give up. As parents, many do
what they can and they shouldn't be punished for every mistake their
children make especially when the child is older and taking away their
allowance won't work very much anymore. it is my recommendation to these
people who like to scream: "but my parents ..." is for them to become
alcoholics because they can still blame something else, in this case the
bottle, and yet still help the economy by buying alcohol with their dollar
votes.  with all of this I have a couple of requests:  please don't blame me
for any response you may give.  please don't tell me the other costs of
alcoholism in this society (let me brush it off as a hypothetical example)
and when writing your messages don't use phrases like "although in my mind
and I suspect in yours too..." because their is always the creep like me who
will show you that you are wrong.  More advice: if they did it to you then
"brainwash" yourself out of any misery or find someone to "unbrainwash" you
simply for the sakeof passing the responsibility to someone else, even if it
is Big Brother or Geraldo Rivera! s

Message: 63695
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Shirley/bears
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 05:35:52

 I saw a Kodiak Grizzly bear a few weeks ago at the fairgrounds. He weighed
somewhere around 1600 lbs. He didn't look very cuddly, even though he and
his owner thought differently. Now you take his owner. THERE'S a man who has
lost IT!

Message: 63696
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Idiot Savants (cont)
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 08:05:46

Jeff, please continue. Fascinating story.

Message: 63697
Author: Hans Glans
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Posts on Responsabil
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 08:34:07

No one wants to acknowledge the fact that consciously, and unconsciously,
they choose how they want their life to be. All of it. This is a hard
concept for most people to understand, because living up to the fact that
some part of you chose what and where you are for you, even though, in your
conscious thought, you don't want to be there. 
The spiritual part of all of it is that you choose what life to live. If you
don't like it, you must choose to change it, not wait for some omniscient
force to change it for you. You are all powerful within the confines of your
own being.

Message: 63698
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Question?
Subject: Cliff
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 09:00:56

What's happening here?? I dialed Apollo - LOTS of line noise and it
connected! Do you have a new modem perhaps? Never has there been line noise
have I connected! What a treat to not have to wait and wait for a clear
sounding line. -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 63699
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann on Modem
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 09:50:37

        The NEW modem was installed yesterday afternoon (3/6/90).....
Let me know if the problem you were having with yours connecting has gone
away.  

        Again, thank Hawley by golly, the Mobile Locksmith with a HEART.
For lock problems such as a lock-out from your car, call 277-9595, and tell
them you saw this ad on Apollo.... he will treat you right!

*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

Message: 63700
Author: $ Shirley Bear
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Kodiak Bear
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 11:05:42

Yes, Paul that owner HAS LOST IT....  No doubt about it.  I just like the 
soft small to medium size, cuddly, stuffed Bears.  Maybe there is hope for 
me after all.  Maybe I haven't lost IT.
                                       ***** Shirley *****

Message: 63701
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 13:50:16

Re:  "Where the heck have you been anyway? You've been missed."

My work has been keeping me busy.  Not to mention my kids and wife and a
dozen other things.  I've been trying to log on at least every 2 to 3 days
and do a zip download to read off line.  I miss you guys too.  (some of you!
 Ha!)

Your Teddy bear talked to you?  I remember talking to my Teddy, but I don't
remember him talking back.  He was indeed a comfort to me at times.  We
bought each of our kids a nice bear when they were babies and put next to
them in bed from the beginning.  Without exception, they all were quite
attached to their bear.  They lost interest about the time they were in 1st
grade.  Jon, the 4th son, developed an attachment to a blanket which we were
able to convert to a diaper.  It was easy to give him a clean diaper every
morning.  A clean blanket every morning is a little tougher.  I've seen some
kids dragging around a blanket that looked like a breeding ground for dirt
and germs.

Re:  "I collect Bears and they are all alive and talk to me.   Uh, Yes they
do.

Who am I to argue?  I imagine that with the last name of "Bear", one could
develop a close relationship with a Teddy that had the same last name.  :-)

Message: 63702
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 15:13:51

Yes! Absolutely yes - my line noise problem has gone away. I logged on twice
today - there was line noise and it still conntected. Hoorah!! Thanks.
                          -=*) ANN (*=-

Message: 63703
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff Beck on PSYCH
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 16:02:25

     It's interesting that a guy who contends that psychology is totally
non-scientific would fill three messages with excerpts from a book by a
clinical neurologist.
     

Message: 63704
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Oliver Sacks
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 16:09:14

[from _The Clothes Have No Emperor_ by Paul Slansky.]
 
4/6/86 -- Oliver Sacks' _The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat_, an
examination of bizarre neurological disorders, begins a 26-week run on the
*Times* best-seller list.  One highlight is an account of oppositely
impaired patients -- aphasiacs who can't understand spoken words, but do
take in information from extraverbal cues, and tonal agnosiacs who
understand the actual words, but miss their emotional content -- watching a
speech by President Reagan.
     "It was the grimaces, the histrionisms, the false gestures and, above
all, the false tones and cadences of the voice," writes Sacks, which caused
the word-deaf aphasiacs to laugh hysterically at the Great Communicator,
while one agnosiac, relying entirely on the actual words, sat in stony
silence, concluding that "he is not cogent...his word-use is improper" and
suspecting that "he has something to conceal."
     "Here then," writes Sacks, "was the paradox of the President's speech. 
We normals -- aided, doubtless, by our wish to be fooled, were indeed well
and truly fooled...And so cunningly was deceptive word-use combined with
deceptive tone, that only the brain-damaged remained intact, undeceived."

     I contend that Jeff Beck's assertions about psychology are wrong.  When
Jeff says "You cannot deduce thought or emotion from behavior," and "You
can't tell what I am feeling when I smile, frown, ejaculate, or whatever,"
he is missing the whole point.
     It's not easy for me to argue, because my knowledge of psychology is
nothing more than the basics, but I do have a strong belief that there is
more to psychology than quackery, and that scientific methods and valuable
research are intregral components in the world of psychology.
     But enough of what I think.  Here are a few excerpts from a
college-level introductory textbook, _Psychology_, by David G. Myers.

     Psychology is a young discipline, with roots in many disciplines, from
physiology to philosophy.
     With current research that ranges from recording nerve cell activity to
studying the effects of psychotherapy, and with prspectives that range from
basic science to philosophy, psychology is a difficult field to define.  In
its early years, psychology was defined as the science of mental life.  Its
major focus was on the *internal* ("covert") experiences of consciousness --
sensations, feelings, and thoughts.  Psychologists of this era therefore
relied upon people's reports of their conscious experiences in response to
various stimuli.  Then, from about 1920 to 1960, American psychologists
redefined psychology as the science of *behavior*.  After all, they said,
science is rooted in observation.  You cannot observe a sensation, a
feeling, or a thought; but you *can* observe how people's *external*
("overt") behaviors are affected by external stimuli.
     Since the 1960s, psychology has recaptured its initial interest in
conscious and unconscious mental processes.  Today, many psychologists study
how our minds process and retain information.  To encompass psychology's
historic concern with both internal and external factors, we can define
PSYCHOLOGY as the science of behavior and mental processes.  The terms
"behavior" and "mental processes" are meant to include just about every
experience of humans and other animals -- experiences that the ancient Greek
philosopher Aristotle (who has been called the first psychologist)
indentified as growing, sensing, remembering, desiring, thinking, and
reacting.

...Psychology's specialties:
 
PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS -- psychologists who explore the links between
biology and behavior.  Such psychologists study hereditary influences on
behavior, investigate the influence of brain chemistry on our moods and
behavior, and indentify the psychological functions of various regions of
the brain.
 
DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGISTS -- psychologists who study the processes of
physical, mental, and social changes throughout the life cycle.  One group
of developmental psychologists have used eye-tracking machines, pacifiers
wired to electronic instruments, and other such devices to reveal the
surprising abilities of newborn babies.  Other developmental psychologists
study how young animals and humans become attached to their parents, and
what happens when a closely attached parent and child are separated.  Other
developmentalists debate which aspects of intelligence change as we age.
 
EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGISTS -- research psychologists who study, among other
things, sensation and perception, learning and memory, motivation and
emotion.  Some experimental psychologists flash syllables, words, and faces
on a screen to see how and how much people remember, and why they forget. 
Others study the elements of learning by teaching animals to perform simple
acts.  Others present various problems to people and record the speed and
accuracy of their responses to discover how the mind processes information.

PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS -- psychologists who study how
individuals are influenced by enduring inner factors (personality
psychology) and how they influence and are influenced by other people
(social psychology).  Such psychologists might be found observing people in
a variety of situations to see whether their behavior reflects a consistent
personality or whether it varies, depending on the people they are with and
the situation.
 
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS -- psychologists who study, assess, and treat people
with psychological difficulties.  Along with training in psychological
research and theory leading to a graduate degree such as the Ph.D., clinical
psychologists also receive several years of training and supervision in
assessing and assisting those with psychological disorders.  Unlike
*psychiatrists*, who have earned an M.D. degree and only then undertake a
residency in psychiatry, clinical psychologists do not diagnose physical
causes of psychological disorders and prescribe drugs.  But they are trained
to administer tests, provide psychotherapy, manage a mental health program,
or do research and training.

Within these subfields of psychology there are differing perspectives.  Each
influences the question psychologists ask and the kind of information they
consider important.
     The *biological perspective* helps us understand how the body and brain
work to create emotions, memories, and sensory expriences.
     The *psychoanalytic perspective* assumes that behavior springs from
unconscious drives and conflicts.
     The *behavioral prspective* is not concerned with our inner biology or
emotions.  Rather, it studies the mechanisms by which observable responses
are acquired and modified in particular environments.
     The *humanistic perspective* arose as a reaction against the
psychoanalytic view, which tends to see people as driven by unconscious
inner forces, and the behavioristic view, which sees people as shaped by our
environemt.  Humanistic psychologists emphasize our capacities to choose our
life patterns and to grow to higher levels of maturity and fullfillment. 
[Funny how this ties in with some of the current discussion.]  They
therefore seek to understand behavior more subjectively, in terms of its
meaning to the individual.
     The *cognitive perspective* explores how the mind processes, retains,
and retrieves information.  *Cognition* refers to thinking and knowing, both
of which are important as aspects of our experience and as determinants of
our actions.

     The starting point of any science is careful observation that
accurately describes events of interest.  In psychology, too, all evidence
involves some type of observation of perceivable events.
     THE CASE STUDY METHOD -- Psychologists sometimes use a *case study*
approach, in which individual cases are studied in great depth and detail
and used to suggest what is true of us all.  Much of our early knowledge
about the function of different brain regions came from case studies of
individuals who had suffered damage to a particular region of the brain and
also had suffered a particular impairment.  The great developmental
psychologist, Jean Piaget, taught us a great deal about children's thinking
through the careful questioning and observation of his own three children.
     THE SURVEY -- The *survey* method of observation studies more cases in
less depth.
     NATURALISTIC OBSERVATION -- Another type of observation is
*naturalistic observation*, which involves watching and recording the
behavior of organisms in their natural environment.  It ranges from the
study of chimpanzee societies in the jungle to observations of parent-child
interactions in different cultures to observations of students' self-seating
patterns in the lunchrooms of desegregated schools.
     EXPERIMENTS -- Experiments enable a researcher to focus on the possible
effects of a single factor or two by holding constant those factors not
being tested and manipulating the one or two being studied.  If behavior
changes when the manipulated factor is varied, while everything else remains
the same, then that factor is having an effect.

      Sorry for putting so much up, but I wanted to get it over with.  The
point I'm trying to make is that psychology covers a wide range and conducts
itself scientifically.  Excerpts from the first chapter of a very basic
textbook are the least I could do to show this, and I could easily come up
with specific examples.  Jeff Beck's assertion that we can never know what
goes on in the mind because it is not directly observable is a superficial
way of looking at it.  He presupposes that psychology's purpose is to
explain exactly what goes on in every instance.  Rather, psychology only
tries to explain what it can without overstepping the bounds of science and
assuming too much, and simply records the observations it does make and goes
from there.  
     Meanwhile, there are conclusions we can draw about what goes on in our
minds in connection with our physical brains.  Finneas Gage is a man who
accidentally had a spike slammed into his frontal lobe, and who was forced
to live the rest of his life with the spike in place there, for fear that
removing it would cause further damage.  The results were that his friends
and coworkers observed him frequently flying into a blind rage for no reason
at all.  Psychologists conclude from this one study, rightly so, that
hostility is connected to physiological events occurring in the frontal
lobe.  From what Jeff Beck has been saying, he would say this is in anvalid
conclusion, but clearly it is entirely logical and valid.
 
     So much for making a long story short.  Hope those of you bored by this
avalanche of messages had the good wisdom to use your [S]kip command.

Message: 63712
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: psychology
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 17:28:49

DIALOG HEARD AT RESTAURANT
 
Business Man:  So, what was you major in college?
 
Business Woman:  I got a degree in business.
 
Man:  Oh, business.
 
Woman:  A degree in business...and a degree in psychology.
 
Man:  Psychology?
 
Woman:  Yes, that's right.  Psychology.  I could analyze the way you're
sitting right now, what you're feeling.
 
Man:  Is my body language that obvious?
 
Woman:  It is to me.

Message: 63713
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Responsibility
Date: 03/07/90  Time: 21:26:53

Self responsibility is the beginning of wisdom. Many people fear the
consequences of controlling their own destiny and prefer the myth
that others are to blame for their circumstances.