(September 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I said he got hoaxed. I told you I'd check up on that (which you should have done before you offered it up as part of your overall sage wisdom).
So you did, and so you are now seemingly convinced. But based on what? A wiki link to him, a google search where you didn't even spell his name right, a company webpage, and another google search? Uh, I know we have different standards, but that's supposed to show this he has been hoaxed? Odd, one of the most famous journalists of our time gets hoaxed on a hot button issue, I'm guessing it would not be hard to find a reference to such an event, but looks like you haven't. So, yeah, I guess that's good ground to safely assume it's all made up.
Quote:So, on to the next bit. I read it, I'm not surprised at the reaction. What is it you think this elucidates?
The resistance that sprung up against the rationalist pov. You know, part of the topic of the thread. Crazy, huh?
So far, it seems like you disagree as a default, but I'm still confused as to what specific part you find out of spec. I've asked you twice what you disagree with re the universal bit, but you haven't said. As to the rest, I don't know what the problem is with that, either, as it seems like you are arguing against the existence or validity of developmental psych or something, but again, I don't know what the sticking point is.
