--- 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/
