Re: The horror of abuse on ASA

From: George Hammond (
Date: Fri Aug 17 2001 - 16:51:15 EDT

  • Next message: Fairhaven: "mystical experience"

    And again, in view of this 4th poster referring to me
    as a "psychotic", I protest the flagrant violations
    of the ASA rules by these posters, and appeal to the moderator to
    enforce the rules of the ASA charter and bar personal attacks
    and the posting of ad hominem filth.

    D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:
    > On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:18:13 -0500 Lucy Masters
    > <> writes:
    > > My thoughts exactly. I see Hammond is off his meds again and
    > > relinquishing to his rage and twisted thought processes. I wish he
    > > would stop using this list as his babysitter. Lucy
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > >>When I politely informed him he was an idiot, >>
    > >
    > > That is interesting. How does one go about that? Even more -- how
    > > does
    > > one conclude that?
    > >
    > > John Burgeson (Burgy)
    > >
    > May I make a small correction and an explanation? I'm not sure that
    > Hammond has ever taken medication. Most obsessives and psychotics do not
    > recognize their condition and so have never been diagnosed and treated.
    > The answer to Burgy's second question is what I call "Premise Number
    > One," because it is so basic and because of its popularity. It is,
    > however, not commonly recognized by those who base their "demonstrations"
    > on it. Its fundamental form is: "Since you disagree with me about ...,
    > you are " with the appropriate pejorative term. If the disagreement is
    > moral, the terms are likely to be perverse, vicious, depraved, etc.
    > Aesthetics brings out philistine, tasteless, etc. Intellectual matters
    > bring out ignorant, stupid, dense, or Hammond's "an idiot." I find that
    > those who have benefited from a good education are less likely to use
    > Premise Number One overtly, for they recognize their fallibility and the
    > tentativeness of their conclusions. At least I like to think so. But, if
    > you look for the infamous premise, I believe you will find it used often.
    > It has the advantage of making thought more efficient, since there is no
    > need to consider the evidences presented by an idiot, a moral leper, and
    > the like.
    > Dave

    Be sure to visit my website below, and please ask your
    news service provider to add  alt.sci.proof-of-god
    George Hammond, M.S. Physics

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 17 2001 - 16:43:10 EDT