brain sizes: Einstein's and women's
k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue Sep 3 23:33:06 EST 2002
John Knight wrote in message
<_K5d9.42598$Ic7.3225906 at news2.west.cox.net>...
>"Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>news:DL2d9.8339$jG2.619454 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> Anyway, don't post anything more to me that 'trashes' other folks.
>> It's flat-out inexcusable that you impose my name within such.
>> k. p. collins
>What, exactly, are you accusing Mr. August of doing, that you didn't
I provided an alternative route which entails enabling folks to
understand how 'prejudice' toward that which is merely-familiar
arises, 'blindly' and automatically, within =all= nervous systems.
Given such understanding, one can find one's way without resort to
I understand it's 'difficult' because it's an unfamiliar perspective
on "mans's inhumanity to man".
That is, because it's unfamiliar, it's not only 'difficult' to
comprehend, but it also 'triggers' 'blindly'-automated 'moving away
So, I've been working to juxtapose the all of the Savagery that
derives in 'blindly'-automated prejudice and the 'difficulty' of
coming to understand this new, unfamiliar perspective - so that folks
can see that the real Difficulty exists in allowing the
'blindly'-automated stuff to continue 'dictating' behavior. [You
know, as it's currently 'fashionable' to say, "Doing nothing is worse
than doing something." And, with respect to the understanding I've
been discussing, it's 'doubly' so, because doing the work inherent in
acquiring the understanding not only eliminates the Savagery, it,
simultaneously, eliminates the 'blind'-automation :-]
Anyway, this's why I discussed all the 'war' stuff.
FWIW, I didn't 'expect' you to get-it. But you've been cross-posting
your anti-this and anti-that discussions into bionet.neuroscience
which is the only 'place' on the planet where I can do my work in
So, in addition to defending Marie Curie against the False statements
you posted with respect to her, I've been writing, in the main, for
the folks in bionet.neuroscience, in the interest of allowing them to
gain further insights into what has been a years-long discussion of
So, although I understand that you probably don't understand, and
that, therefore, what I've posted to you probably 'seems-offensive'
to you, Truth is that most of what's in what I've posted to you is
Precious-Gift-of-Understanging stuff, and not inherently 'offensive'.
You just don't understand what's in what I've been posting to you.
You can understand it.
And I can tell you, with Certainty, that, if you do the work inherent
in understanding it, you'll find Joy in-it.
k. p. collins
More information about the Neur-sci