Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
At 02:04 AM 9/12/2005, BC, you wrote:
Only a foolish S scientist, etc. would make a general statement. Was
Piaget a fool?
///
Jack Uretsky wrote:
Amended Deutsch:
Ein Gegenbespiel hat der Wert ein Tausend Bespielen.
Yes in SS, psyc, etc., etc., etc. A general statement need only be
slaughtered once. If there are exceptions, then the general statement is
False.
Regards,
Jack
Which reminds me, New Scientist - current issue quotes a refereed Journal
report to the effect that of three randomized groups required to meditate,
given a Spiritual, a non-Spiritual directive or a simple "relax" directive
the group with the Spiritual meditation motif was able to withstand a
moderate physical distress longer than both other groups after a
one week regimen.
(The distress was from submerging one hand in water held at
2 degC for a timed period.)
Given ahem...experimental evidence of the effectiveness of Christian style
prayer - this one counter-example evidently confounds all agnostics
and atheists.
Or does it?
:-)
Brian
Brian Whatcott Altus OK Eureka!