On Monday 18 June 2001 19:35, you wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 07:13:58PM -0400, Smitty wrote:
> > And you have only proven what I said. Thanks.
>
> Ah, I see how it works. I quite explicitly make a case for something
> and you dismiss it without any rationale. Riiiiiight.
False accusation. I have been giving you rationale but you refuse to
comprehend and resort to invalidation.
>
> > > If you want the answer, cite it with more precision.
> >
> > You are the one who asked for the data, Isaiah. If you care to pay me a
> > consulting fee, I will spend a couple hours retrieving it from my files
> > and write a report. You are the one who asked, not I. There have been
> > folks who have already spent considerable time to convince these
> > university yahoos about the merits of alt. medicine. They don't care to
> > do anything about it. Only a grassroots movement has made any headway in
> > getting alt. medicine is use.
>
> But you're the one that gives a damn, despite your statements. ;)
>
> > "Slow to change" is quite a euphemism! The AMA has spent a great deal of
> > time and money trying to crush ALL alternative medical movements. That
> > is very well documented. check out Harris Coulter's books, Griffin's
> > World without Cancer to name a few. Using that as an excuse for the APA
> > is just another false excuse.
>
> One person's book qualifies for "very well documented"? How the world
> has changed!
REREAD what I wrote: I mentioned TWO books and then stated "to name a few",
meaning there are other books.
Whatever drug you are on may be impeding your comprehension.
>
> > The icepick treatment I described is essentially a pre-frontal lobotomy.
> > Yes, it has been known to result in death. You seem to be saying that if
> > they do it to themselves, it is bad, but if a "professional" psychiatrist
> > does it, well, that's perfectly allright? If it is illegal for someone
> > to inflict that injury on themselves, why is it not illegal for anyone
> > else to inflict such a thing on another? Also, your last comment is a
> > typical psychiatric tactic:: When psychs lose an argument, they tell you,
> > in some fashion, that you are crazy. (kook, nuts, bonkers, etc.) Very
> > basic invalidation. You have learned the psych arts quite well from
> > your father.
>
> Well, if they do it to themselves it's called attempted suicide. If
> it's masked with a legal term, it's still bad, it's just legal. Like the
> difference between "killing" and "murder". Not hard to understand.
>
> It wouldn't surprise me if I did pick up a few things from dear old
> Dad. But the fact remains, you know no moderation. That makes you a kook
> in my book.
>
> > My business, now. If you cannot have a rational discussion without
> > resorting to psych tactics, you're not worth my time. So long.
>
> Can't multithread? What a shame. Doesn't take much more brain power
> than understanding the difference between a psychiatrist and a
> psychologist, though, so I can see where you'd have some trouble. ;)
False accusation again. I know the difference between the two and the tactics
are largely the same.
>
> > Smitty
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:14:55 EDT