A Matter of Life and Death and Neuroscience

G K GRAY gord at homostudy.win-uk.net
Fri Oct 11 04:16:45 EST 1996

In article <53k6ja$68d at ren.cei.net>, Lee Kent Hempfling (lkh at mail.cei.net) writes:
>To my private email, upon receipt of the below copied interogatory
>Mr. Collins responded thusly:
>>>Date sent:        Thu, 10 Oct 1996 20:40:05 -0400
>>>From:             kenneth paul collins <KPCollins at postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
>>>To:               lkh at mail.cei.net
>>>Subject:          Re: A Matter of Life and Death and Neuroscience
>>>Lee Kent Hempfling wrote:
>>> Mr. Collins;
>>>  I understand your frustrations. Let me ask but a few particular
>>> questions regarding your theory. Please feel free to elaborate to your
>>> satisfaction:
>>Lee, sorry, I can only discuss such things in public forums. ken
>OK, Ken..............Public it is. I will try one more time. But let
>me assert this: If you have something in a theory form and wish to
>discuss it and refuse to discuss it in private you are cutting off the
>ONLY method you will receive any attention in. Very few will stick
>their necks out in public to entertain a different idea. I know. I've
>been there.
>If you are intent upon public discussion so be it. I had offered, as
>is posted below, to keep the discussion private. THAT was for YOUR
>protection. I shant offer such protection again.
>This was my letter , in private, that Mr. Collins refuses in private.
><snip headers>
>Mr. Collins;
> I understand your frustrations. Let me ask but a few particular
>questions regarding your theory. Please feel free to elaborate to your
>1: Define Duality as you use it in the theory title.
>2: Would you provide a brief synopsis of the main thrusts , the major
>point of the theory?
>3: Would you be so kind as to define the following terms as it relates
>to the theory?
>       A: Intelligence
>       B: Learning     
>       C: Memory
>       D: Muscle motivation
>       E: Processing protocol
>       F: Binding Aspect
>       G: Input mechanisms
>       H: Consciousness
>That is all I will ask at this point. I am most curious as to the
>basic fundemental qualia of your theory. Your response will be kept in
>confidence if requested.
>lee kent hempfling
>chairman, ceo
>Neutronics Technologies Corporation
><snip sig> <end formerly private email>
>OK ..... Mr. Collins.....  I do not ask you for specifics, if you are
>keeping anything at all private. I wrote with the intention of perhaps
>lending assistance in getting your ideas heard. I can not stand it
>when someone's thoughts and theories are refused audience just because
>they are not yet known. But I have another problem perhaps more
>intense: If it is public controversy you seek, I do not care to
>partake. But if it is give and take and critique and evaluation, and
>challenge and intellect then by all means answer the questions. I
>expect the same from anyone dealing with this company's technology and
>I respect their doing so. The more challenge the better. My intention
>was to keep any response private so as not to interfere with your
>intentions of publishment.  Then.
>I did not THEN address your original letter to the group. I shall
>withhold comment on the letter based upon your response here.
>Publicly, I might add.
>Lee Kent Hempfling                   |lkh at cei.net
>Neutronics Technolgies Corporation   |http:www.cei.net/~lkh/ntc/
>PO Box 3127 Fort Smith Ar 72913      |Due to traffic: new improved site.
>Room temperature, cold dynamic system, quantum computation, built and proven.
>Video available at the above site.
This exchange is touching a matter involving the conflicting areas
between business ethics, scientific protocol and the ethical
problems with which philosophy is most concerned. Nor should we
forget the extremely difficult epoch in which WE i.e. the WHOLE of
humankind now live, and through which in order to survive at all we
must COLLECTIVELY proceed with the greatest care and attention to
even what may too often seem to be trivialities on which the most
praiseworthy enterprises can founder.
        I welcome Ken's efforts to widen discussion and I deeply
appreciate the concerns that LKH expresses in that same context.
Whatever course or courses they take, the problems underlying
their exchanges must remain with us until we find means of
resolving them one-by-one or in groups. They are debating matters
of an Unexplored World!

Remember the story of Columbus and the Egg.

Cheers!  Gord

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list