Right visual field to left hemisphere. Why?

Cijadrachon cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Wed Oct 14 17:19:37 EST 1998


(To someone: Babbling. Skip.)

(F. Frank LeFever) + kkollins wrote:

>... "On the Automation of Knowing within Central Nervous Systems" 
>...The "molecular" stuff 

What  do you think about both topics?

>My Purpose has been, from the beginning, to present a Gift of Understanding to
>Folks who stand in need of such. This remains my Purpose.

Sort of  an LSD-answer:

Have you read about  what I call eg.3 ?
That one, but I do not know how you can access there.
Maybe if normal born not directly but observing daydreaming.

By the way, there seem to be emotional differences between people(s).
Might make some of  the gift of  understanding more tricky.

>maintaining an unbreakable "key" to the whole body of understanding. 
I do not  have the whole body of understanding, nor even the key
anymore to the parts I once had, 
but from what I still recall I know that you certainly do not have a
key to the WHOLE body  of understanding.

>I did this so that I could continue to Pursue communication of the understanding to those
>on whose behalves the work was initiated, and accomplished... folks who
>Suffer-Greatly under the yoke of unwittingly-automated "Prejudice",
>most-significantly, battered Children. It remains my single Purpose to achieve
>this communication. Because of matters I needn't get into, the need to
>communicate the "key" is hard upon me, and I'd like to do so in a Public
>Science meeting. 
I  believe the key is within eg.3 and yourself, and maybe one other
place.
Science in the sense of scire is not there yet and maybe never will,
nor do you seem to be, though partially maybe in other ways.
Maybe try the shrinks, they might go for a lot, as long as you make
them believe that it is wise. The animal  cutter front might not be
helpful.
The Frankensteins might not give a damn about battered kids as long as
no cats or other mammals were cut to prove whatever it is that you
might know for sure.

>My only "condition" is that there be an adequate (significant)
>representation of members of the groups 
It is not really the task of the people here to make you interest
enough others.
Maybe write a book directly addressed to them?
Or offer courses?
>for whom the work was undertaken, and accomplished, 
And maybe for yourself, young? Or someone else? Be careful you do not
generalize too much.
>in attendance (physically present) at that meeting. I will,
>there, present the Gift of Understanding, well-prepared, to these Folks. Then,
>in the Light of these Folks' unhindered Awareness and Endeavor, Science, and
>everyone else, can do whatever they Choose to do. 
Capitalizing sounds weird, why do you do it?

And what do you connect with Endeavor here?
(Serious?)

And for curiosity: Where are you from?

>I will maintain all of my Patent Rights, which are myriad, and assure that they are put to best-use in
>Serving the General Good.

And where do patent rights come in battering children?
And if tomorrow you had an accident and died, how do you know that
they are put to best use?

>And I'll have the Peace I've for which I've so-long yearned, and probably go
>for "a walk in a park".

I at times find parks horribly artificial here in Berlin.

"Square nature."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>Re. "kccheng..." Enough said? k. p. collins

>I did this so that I could continue to Pursue communication of the understanding to those
>on whose behalves the work was initiated, and accomplished... folks who
>Suffer-Greatly under the yoke of unwittingly-automated "Prejudice",
>most-significantly, battered Children. 

flefever at ix.netcom.com(F. Frank LeFever) wrote:

>re final line: yes, enough said.  You do qualify as a kccheng clone.

(...)

>Well, how coy can you get.  Thank you thank you thank you for those
>gracious hints: Collins, K. (1980).  Now if you could hint at the name
>of the journal we MIGHT be motivated to look at this "proof"...  Maybe
>just the initials of the journal?  or just the publisher? or which data
>base (e.g.  Medline or SCI) might have indexed that journal that year?

The first time the year indication I thought to be fun, after the
reply, not.

There are those people where I start to wonder if someone had battered
them as children often enough, if instead of nerding they'd have more
understanding for others.
 
The type who seems to be zero able to think himself into the position
of another.
Be it a child, an adult with his childhood haunting him and seeking a
way to make it easier for others.

Or a winged bird the eye-nerves cut.

(If I'd  believe in that: I hope you become a bird in your next life.
Dreaming of flying with other birds, with your eye-nerves cut.)

Or our cousins the apes abused pervertly.

How easy it is for the own comfort not to think yourself into others.

Maybe the Frankensteins cannot even feel themselves into others,
never trying seriously for even just an hour into each mentioned.

And that is why they are doing what they are doing.
Maybe that is because reading through slicing results and hunting for
something about the brain, they do not perceive much about the own 
nor others anymore.

Even less than the MBDed in the round occasionally still do.
Which should make you think for serious, though likely it won't.

An advice: Stick the journal the place mentioned to Tom.  ;-)
Or read it and in the Re instead of switching eg.3 to prime input, try
eg.1, or if that with you does not work because eg.3 and you&front
block,  then switch yourself & the frontal cortex to prime input.
And  if you ever have some Science meeting, make an extra whateever,
only he has to see how to inform according people about it.


So he'll have the peace for which he as so-long yearned.


And can go for the walk in a park.   :-)


Neuro has A Gift Not To See A Healer's Path.

Seeming to value destruction over serious help.

Your journal might not make it up to him nor others ever, Frank.

And  if you were a different man, 
you'd see to next time there is an according meeting he can come, and
others who were abused with physical violence, 
and if you can sense into the past childhood of others, maybe would
even help invite them,
so he can talk and find more peace (and maybe some others, too), 
and for a change you "simply" shut up and "simply" watch the faces of
those who are there, even if just very few should come,
and then maybe you are understanding things that you will not find in
your journals about different pasts and childhoods, if  you are
understanding in watching.

Would you be where you are, if you had been abused as a child, Frank,
or had less cells than other children and adults, or had less coherent
memory powers like of the one you commented the way you did?

Have you ever asked where  you'd  be then inside and outside?

(Somehow I doubt  you'd then make a lot of the remarks you do.
Though I guess you  rather type snide remarks than to think yourself
there.)



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list