email stark's colleagues - those that dislike him will love it, and there will be many since not all univ.
of washington profs are as newsworthy as he, or have bestselling books, and those that like him will be concerned.
all it will take is an email header "does stark back jws in pedophile scandal?
I have tried to be polite and nice to everyone on this forum. But I have received mostly ad hominem argumentation and been treated like dirt.
It is not so much that I am full of myself. Eu just hates injustice. And he is not about to stand by and see the eminent Dr Stark attacked on this board. That would be akin to assaulting Dr larc. It ain't going to happen around me.
email stark's colleagues - those that dislike him will love it, and there will be many since not all univ.
of washington profs are as newsworthy as he, or have bestselling books, and those that like him will be concerned.
all it will take is an email header "does stark back jws in pedophile scandal?
Herbert
I guess you are neither. Just as I thought. True intellectuals or academics normally do not resort to the measures you have implemented in your crusade against Dr Stark.
It is sad, sir.
eutapro,.
you may wonder why some people jumped on you so hard.
it is because you came here proclaiming yourself an intellectual, a scholar, or what ever you called yourself.
[Eutaprostate:
Please, please, please, sir (vomit) dispense with the over abundant use of honorifics. Not only is it in bad taste, but, it’s pretentious and condescending, as well. While your at it, you may want to stop playing games, too. Lyers suck; trolls suck; lying Crotch Tower trolls suck even more, but, you being a lying Crotch Tower troll who insists on using Mr. And sir in every adversarial post you spew forth suck most of all.]
Some of us were taught manners, sir. Now if being polite bothers you, sir, then maybe you need to ignore my use of honorifics. I was merely showing respect for my elders and for those who have accomplished so much in academia like Mr larc evidently has.
When have I lied? Could you please help me to understand what you are talking about, sir. I have tried to be upfront as possible. What more do you want?
email stark's colleagues - those that dislike him will love it, and there will be many since not all univ.
of washington profs are as newsworthy as he, or have bestselling books, and those that like him will be concerned.
all it will take is an email header "does stark back jws in pedophile scandal?
Stark is an excellent scholar. His works speak for themselves. Eu cannot understand why anyone would attack this man.
Herbert, are you an academic, an intellectual or an intellectual academic?
Curious people want to know.
Yours
Eu
eutapro,.
you may wonder why some people jumped on you so hard.
it is because you came here proclaiming yourself an intellectual, a scholar, or what ever you called yourself.
Mr larc
Please check the CC and Objectivity threads for my comments, sir.
"[jehovah's witnesses] have some ... very well-designed articles telling parents how to teach their children to deal with the molestation situation .
and in ways so that the child will feel secure about coming home and reporting it."dr.
rodney stark, professor of sociology.
Dr Stark is a shining star in his field. I am surprised at the immediate negative reaction that has occurred in connection with his statements concerning jws. Are we trying to throw serious science out the door?
i must say that as a neutral scientific observer of this site--it seems that things are kind of one-sided here.
i thought this was a board with both devout jws and ex-jws on it.
on further reflection it appears that this medium of communication should probably be called ex-jw.com.
Mr larc
I defer to your authority, wisdom and experience. I have read some of your input on this board, sir, and it is truly phenomenal. My dad also taught me to respect my elders. So I will reply kindly to you, sir.
[Let me try to respond to you in a calm rational way, as you have requested.
You said that you are interested in the effects of classical conditioning within certain religions. It would seem to me, that classical conditioning would play a significant role in some religions, but not much within the JWs. I think operant conditioning would be a much more significant factor for the JWs.]
Why do you think that OC is a more significant factor, sir? I am new to the game and would like to know why you make this observation.
[Since you say you are interested in this subject, what you have learned to date, in this regard. Related to this, can you please provide peer reviewed articles on the effects of classical conditioning within religion?]
I have not yet run across any articles that support my thesis yet, sir. Do you know of any? I a new to this game. But we are looking for sources. I am humble, teachable and willing to learn.
[Also, can you provide the same such articles on any subject as the apply specificly to the Witnesses?]
There are none that I know of, sir. We are trying to introduce a revolutionary approach to the subject. Have you ever heard of critical psychology?
yours truly is a student studying classical conditioning and the role it plays in the life of ex-jws.
do you think that cc works both ways?
could ex-jws leave the organization because the world (as jw teach) negatively conditioned them?
[What the website you point out suggests is that, under certain circumstances, classical conditioning can produce an operant behavior, essentially as a side effect. But the original response is still involuntary (e.g., the girl has a "fear reaction" on hearing the sound that she associates with seeing the rat). I can't think of a way that such a scenario would play out in terms of joining or leaving a religion.]
I do not think CC only or primarily deals with involuntary responses. It never can when we are considering the effect that variegated stimuli have on substances of a rational nature.
Pavlov's dogs are not rational substances or autonomous relations. Neither do they possess volitional liberty. Rational substances or metaphysical animals do have libertarian freedom. So Eu does not think that one can limit any type of conditioning to involuntary responses. Both types of conditioning involve voluntary responses based on the faculties of reason which conterminously interplay with volitional forces to react or avert from particular stimuli. My project is nascent and has a long way to go. But the ideas we are suggesting are revolutionary and could change the way the psychology of religion is practiced.
Yours
Eu
i must say that as a neutral scientific observer of this site--it seems that things are kind of one-sided here.
i thought this was a board with both devout jws and ex-jws on it.
on further reflection it appears that this medium of communication should probably be called ex-jw.com.
[U,
You're starting to slip in to your old habit of referring to yourself in the third person. Careful, or you'll start throwing "phoneme" around and your cover will be blown.]
I refer to myself in the third person because I hate to say 'I' all the time. It is a normal writing convention. And do not worry about me using the word "phoneme" since I am not that interested in cognitive psychology or linguistics.
[If you think you're making some sort of grand point... great! Just don't try to pass yourself off in any way as an impartial observer.]
I have tried to remain neutral so far.
[Eutaprolapse, learn how to speak English and get a life.]
What are you talking about? My English is just fine. I am not an English teacher. But Eu can communicate with others in English.
i must say that as a neutral scientific observer of this site--it seems that things are kind of one-sided here.
i thought this was a board with both devout jws and ex-jws on it.
on further reflection it appears that this medium of communication should probably be called ex-jw.com.
[As usual AlanF,slices and dices with well chosen words and intellect. He has served up many dish`s of dumb-ass troll.This one will not be his last.(LOL)...OUTLAW]
This statement is surprising. AlanF confused "thought" and "concluded" and then resorted to unwarranted ad hominem. Yet you commend him for his fine efforts.
Hmmmmmm
