--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- markmeredith2002 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > Dr Pete, and several others in this group, have > > made > > > > it clear that > > > > they don't exist. Somehow their posts keep > > coming, > > > > which I guess is > > > > proof that God exists since someone must be > > doing > > > > it. > > > > > > Don't confound ego ("I" sense) with consciousness. > > In > > > waking state they are thought to be the same. > > They're > > > not. Also, why must some "one" be doing anything? > > > Just because action occurs doesn't mean that there > > is some > > > deliberate intent behind it. It just occurs. > > > > Not being glib or sick. But there is a strange > > parallel here. > > > > Dr. EasyOne indicated that Terry Shaivo's seemingly > > cognitive > > responses of recognition to her family were in fact > > simply a complex > > response mechanism -- co-existing along with with a > > vegetative > > cerebral cortex. Response just happens, no doer. > > > > Dr. Pete articulates a similar phenomenon of no > > actor -- my > > interpretation -- that all actions by the body / > > mind -- known by the > > ignorant as Dr. Pete -- are simply a complex > > response mechanism with > > no "doer". > > > > Should we remove Dr Pete's feeding tubes? (Ok, I am > > being glib here -- > > but its just a complex response mechanism with no > > doer.) > > > > The question is how are Dr. Pete's actions aka > > complex responses > > different from Terry Shaivo's? (aside from her's > > being better reasoned > > at times. Sorry. Its the glibness guna acting up > > again.) > > Well said anon (the glibness guna part....and the > rest)! Terry has a profoundly damaged brain and > therefore a profoundly limited mind. Mostly brainstem: > body homeostasis, orienting reflexes. An ego? I hope > not. There is no difference between "your" responses > and "hers." She probably doesn't have an ego to > falsely take ownwership of action. You're a theif and > she's not! > -Peter
It takes a thief to know one? What leads the mind body ka Dr. Pete to conclude that the mind body ka anon is a thief? Wondering (or is it wandering): If there is a recognition that theft can occur, then can theft still exit? Thats obscure, and perhaps inarticulate, but a real point. It would appear that only those who are unaware of theft can be thieves -- in this context. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/