Re: Religion and conctrete thinking
You might try searching the literature on "religious fundamentalism." Susan C. Cloninger, PhD Professor of Psychology The Sage Colleges Troy, New York 12180 office: (518) 244-2071 --- Original Email From: don allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sep 08, 2004 03:42 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Religion and conctrete thinking Hi all- A student is interested in comparing the level of concrete/abstract thought in people who view themselves as theists or non-theists. I haven't found anything useful on this issue in PsychInfo. Does anyone know of work done in this area. As usual, thanks in advance for your assistance. -Don.Don AllenPsychology Dept.Langara College100 W. 49th Vancouver, B.C. V5Y 2Z6Canada604-323-5871--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flourishing under stress - NY Times story
This might be useful to many TIPsters: Cracking Under the Pressure? It's Just the Opposite, for Some For Michael Jones, an architect at a top-tier firm in New York, juggling multiple projects and running on four hours of sleep is business as usual. Mr. Jones has adjusted, he says, to a rapid pace and the constant pressure that leads his colleagues to "blow up" from time to time. ... Mr. Jones belongs to a rare breed of worker that psychologists have struggled to understand for decades, not for the sheer amount of stress they grapple with day to day, but for the way they flourish under it. The full story can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/10/health/10stress.html?th - Michael J. Renner Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Professor of Psychology Nazareth College 4245 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14618 http://www.naz.edu/dept/cas/index.html [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1.585.389.2391 Fax: +1.585.389.2392 - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: General Psyc non-lecture
Do any of you TIPSTERS teach General Psychology (Intro) in a way that uses no lecture (or only a tiny bit of lecture)? I am thinking about restructuring this course in a radical way, but only have a hazy vision of where I might go. I have 50 students/section, so there is a good deal of flexibility. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Lenore Frigo Shasta College Redding, CA see http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~allanr/psi.html on the PSI method. -- * PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * *http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html* --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Given the flexibility of the concept "related directly to teaching," that I've seen on this list, I can imagine a clear relevance of this poll to the teaching of psychology. For example, how can one group of individuals (citizens of the US) appear (in polls) to be closely divided on the merits of these candidates while so many other groups report that one is clearly superior to the other? Does this reflect a difference in the culture of the groups? Does this represent a form of groupthink in operation in a very large group? Do differences in polling organizations generate differences in findings based on the wording of their polls? (Nice methodology question, I think.) This is at least as relevant to the teaching of psychology as the extended discussion we've had on the cultural differences behind the naming of tropical storms. Now I will go back to Weather Underground . . . the NOGAPS model currently has Ivan headed right at yours truly. Claudia Stanny At 05:45 PM 9/9/2004 -0700, you wrote: > >> Are we allowed to discuss anything political on this list? > >Sorry, but I for one, would wish we didn't, unless it relates directly to >teaching. > >Annette > Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Associate Professor Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/ General Track Coordinator Department of PsychologyPhone: (850) 474 - 3163 University of West Florida FAX:(850) 857 - 6060 Pensacola, FL 32514 - 5751 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Hi Y'all, Politically related discussions may have a place on this list particularly for those of us who teach courses in political psychology. Having said that, there is a different concern for listservs sponsored by non-profit organizations and institutions. Using a listserv for campaign activities can jeopardize the institution's tax exempt status under section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, while political discussions in and of themselves are not problematic in relation to the tax code, endorsement of a particular candidate and electioneering may have some repercussions. For more info, see the press release issued from the IRS - http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=122887,00.html Best, Linda Patricia Spiegel wrote: I agree that this was a very interesting poll. I read the whole thing when I first saw it. Are we allowed to discuss anything political on this list? Patricia Keith-Spiegel -- Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D. President-Elect, Peace Psychology Division 48, APA Secretary, Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Div. 2, APA) Professor of Psychology Coordinator - Holocaust & Genocide Studies, Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights Webster University 470 East Lockwood St. Louis, MO 63119 Main Webpage: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's (and woman's) best friend. . . . Inside a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
I'm feeling defensive. I didn't mean to suggest that the particular poll in question wasn't relevant to teaching. I seem to have been misinterpreted, although I tried to be clear by snipping and only including in my reply a single sentence. In addition, our server went wild and apparently 3 copies went to the list! (Just be glad the list is not like the editor of a journal to whom the server sent 7 copies of my email--what he must have thought!) The comment I had snipped from a previous email asked whether political discussions would be appropriate. It was that broader question that I, for one, would not like to see. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Department of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
On 10 Sep 2004, Claudia Stanny wrote: > Given the flexibility of the concept "related directly to teaching," that I've > seen on this list, I can imagine a clear relevance of this poll to the > teaching of psychology. One of the things I really appreciate about this list is that it has no relevancy police, and we depend on our own common sense and judgement whether something is suitable to post. Given this, I don't think it's a crime against TIPS to occasionally post something which we boldly declare (as Chris Green did) has no relevance to the teaching of psychology. Interesting is more important than relevant. Besides, being creative, we can often see a link to teaching, as Claudia does above, even when the poster him/herself thinks otherwise. Stephen ___ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm ___ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Directly related to Psychology
See http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/10/opinion/10bloom.html For an OpEd article on dualism. As an old monist, I'll vote against it ;-) -- * PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * *http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html* --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
I believe this reflects a Eurocentric point of view and a disdain for Third World perspectives where politics and elections have no relevance. (Spoken on behalf of Sylvester since his server is probably down). CMH * Charles M. Huffman, Ph.D. Chair, Psychology Dept. Cumberland College, Box 7990 Williamsburg, KY 40769 (606) 539-4419 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * -Original Message- From: Stephen Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:40 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election On 10 Sep 2004, Claudia Stanny wrote: > Given the flexibility of the concept "related directly to teaching," that I've > seen on this list, I can imagine a clear relevance of this poll to the > teaching of psychology. One of the things I really appreciate about this list is that it has no relevancy police, and we depend on our own common sense and judgement whether something is suitable to post. Given this, I don't think it's a crime against TIPS to occasionally post something which we boldly declare (as Chris Green did) has no relevance to the teaching of psychology. Interesting is more important than relevant. Besides, being creative, we can often see a link to teaching, as Claudia does above, even when the poster him/herself thinks otherwise. Stephen ___ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm ___ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gay behavior and hurricanes
Someone asked Evangelist Pat Robertson what he thought of Gay Days at Disney World in Orlando. He replied "don't they have hurricanes in Florida?" Michael Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Linda Woolf, Ph.D. wrote: Hi Y'all, Politically related discussions may have a place on this list particularly for those of us who teach courses in political psychology. Having said that, there is a different concern for listservs sponsored by non-profit organizations and institutions. Using a listserv for campaign activities can jeopardize the institution's tax exempt status under section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, while political discussions in and of themselves are not problematic in relation to the tax code, endorsement of a particular candidate and electioneering may have some repercussions. For more info, see the press release issued from the IRS - http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=122887,00.html Now we can drag the issue back into teaching. This is an operational definition quesstion. If I write that Candidate A is a moron, full of codswallop, am I expressing a personal opinion or am I engaged in electioneering? Ken --- Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 USA --- --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Hi Linda, While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is inappropriate on the list (discussion of politics or political events in terms of using the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally appropriate), one point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a candidate, not the members. If, for example, my sig file were to endorse Kerry & Edwards--or if I posted a message that endorsed Nadar (I won't even consider the alternative example hypothetically :-), it would have no effect on the non-profit status of the list or the institution hosting it at all. That falls under the protection of free speech on the part of the list members. On the other hand, if Bill--speaking as listowner instead of as a member of the list--were to endorse a candidate for office, there could be a problem as a result. Thus I can argue that Nadar would make a better President from an environmentalist's standpoint, Louis could argue that Kerry would make a better President from an historic perspective, and Michael Sylvester could argue that Bush would make a better President because he isn't Eurocentric (he obviously doesn't like Europeans either :-), and it would be legally--if not contextually--acceptable. In practice, we're all better off if we leave personal politics at home when we discuss issues on the list--unless they apply to the teaching of our classes or to our research, of course. But, on the other hand, "leaving politics at home" is something we've never done here--such political topics as discrimination, minority rights, Eurocentrism, etc. have traditionally been discussed here as well--and there's really no difference in those discussions than in ones dealing with International views on Kerry and Bush. Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" -Original Message- From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 11:32 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election Hi Y'all, Politically related discussions may have a place on this list particularly for those of us who teach courses in political psychology. Having said that, there is a different concern for listservs sponsored by non-profit organizations and institutions. Using a listserv for campaign activities can jeopardize the institution's tax exempt status under section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, while political discussions in and of themselves are not problematic in relation to the tax code, endorsement of a particular candidate and electioneering may have some repercussions. For more info, see the press release issued from the IRS - http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=122887,00.html --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Gosh, Annettee . . . I just thought you were being emphatic. ;-) I fully understand the point Annette was trying to make. I also would not like to see the list devolve into a testimonials on behalf of favored candidates. And I don't entirely object to silliness, provided it is sufficiently interesting and/or funny. (Now let us try to measure that!) Linda raises an interesting concern. Just how slippery is this political slope? Must be tough for the moderators of a list on the teaching of political science! Best, Claudia At 08:32 AM 9/10/2004 -0700, *Annette* wrote: >I'm feeling defensive. > >I didn't mean to suggest that the particular poll in question wasn't relevant >to teaching. I seem to have been misinterpreted, although I tried to be clear >by snipping and only including in my reply a single sentence. > >In addition, our server went wild and apparently 3 copies went to the list! >(Just be glad the list is not like the editor of a journal to whom the server >sent 7 copies of my email--what he must have thought!) > >Annette > Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Associate Professor Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/ General Track Coordinator Department of PsychologyPhone: (850) 474 - 3163 University of West Florida FAX:(850) 857 - 6060 Pensacola, FL 32514 - 5751 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
I think there should be no "blanket" rules. There seems to be a prejudice against political postings on this list that doesn't come into play when other irrelevant topics surface (like sports, for example. I have watched many, many off-topic sports posts go by with nary a peep out of anyone.) I think there should be a consistent policy, or we should be trusted as adults to use our judgment if possible. Nancy Melucci Long Beach City College --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
OK, I will jump in one more time with my question and ask if this is relevant to teaching. This administration is clearly anti-science. As Chris Matthews has said, "Do you want the same diseases in 20 years? Then who to vote for is clear." My colleagues at NIH are very concerned. There is a move afoot to pull already approved grants for political reasons. NIH is scheduled for a very short increase (far lower than needed to keep up with inflation, and that small budget is earmarked for bioterrorism research). Scientific findings are misrepresented to the public to fit political agendas (and there is incredibly good documentation for that assertion.) One colleague said that we are entering an ice-age of science, and unless strong support continues fewer scientists will want to enter the research field. Stem cell research is VERY controversial for good reason, but one candidate does indicate that tight standards would apply and only to-be discarded blastocysts would be used whereas the current administration does allow a few already existing lines to be used, but there is concern that many are contaminated with mouse blood. And I could go on...but my purpose is truly not to advance a certain candidate, although I, of course, do so in the process of sounding an alert that I DO think is relevant to teaching behavioral scientists and our students who are interested in a science career. Patricia Keith-Spiegel - Original Message - From: "Rick Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:18 AM Subject: RE: International poll on US election > Hi Linda, > > While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is inappropriate > on the list (discussion of politics or political events in terms of using > the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally appropriate), one > point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a > candidate, not the members. If, for example, my sig file were to endorse > Kerry & Edwards--or if I posted a message that endorsed Nadar (I won't > even consider the alternative example hypothetically :-), it would have no > effect on the non-profit status of the list or the institution hosting it > at all. That falls under the protection of free speech on the part of the > list members. On the other hand, if Bill--speaking as listowner instead of > as a member of the list--were to endorse a candidate for office, there > could be a problem as a result. Thus I can argue that Nadar would make a > better President from an environmentalist's standpoint, Louis could argue > that Kerry would make a better President from an historic perspective, and > Michael Sylvester could argue that Bush would make a better President > because he isn't Eurocentric (he obviously doesn't like Europeans either > :-), and it would be legally--if not contextually--acceptable. > > In practice, we're all better off if we leave personal politics at home > when we discuss issues on the list--unless they apply to the teaching of > our classes or to our research, of course. But, on the other hand, > "leaving politics at home" is something we've never done here--such > political topics as discrimination, minority rights, Eurocentrism, etc. > have traditionally been discussed here as well--and there's really no > difference in those discussions than in ones dealing with International > views on Kerry and Bush. > > Rick > > > -- > > Rick Adams > Capella University School of Technology > Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. > Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love > you leave behind when you're gone." > -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 11:32 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: Re: International poll on US election > > Hi Y'all, > > Politically related discussions may have a place on this list particularly > for those of us who teach courses in political psychology. > > Having said that, there is a different concern for listservs sponsored by > non-profit organizations and institutions. Using a listserv for campaign > activities can jeopardize the institution's tax exempt status under > section 501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Thus, while political > discussions in and of themselves are not problematic in relation to the > tax code, endorsement of a particular candidate and electioneering may > have some repercussions. For more info, see the press release issued from > the IRS - http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=122887,00.html > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [E
Re: International poll on US election
Hi On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Ken Steele wrote: > Now we can drag the issue back into teaching. > > This is an operational definition quesstion. > > If I write that Candidate A is a moron, full of codswallop, am I > expressing a personal opinion or am I engaged in electioneering? Depends on an interaction between political affiliation of candidate A and political affiliation of person making judgment about your behavior. Let's use the neutral letters R and D to denote two different political parties. Then here is the "model": Affiliation Cand A Judge Judgment R R Personal Opinion R D Electioneering D R Electioneering D D Personal Opinion At least that is how things work in Canada (changing some of the "neutral" letters). Best wishes Jim James M. Clark (204) 786-9757 Department of Psychology(204) 774-4134 Fax University of Winnipeg 4L05D Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED] CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Hi On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Patricia Spiegel wrote: > OK, I will jump in one more time with my question and ask if this is > relevant to teaching. > > This administration is clearly anti-science. As Chris > Matthews has said, "Do you want the same diseases in 20 > years? Then who to vote for is clear." ... > And I could go on...but my purpose is truly not to advance a > certain candidate, although I, of course, do so in the > process of sounding an alert that I DO think is relevant to > teaching behavioral scientists and our students who are > interested in a science career. I wonder if anti-intellectual wouldn't be a better term? Isn't it also the case that the administration is keen on non-professionals (i.e., church groups) providing social services instead of trained secular professionals (e.g., clinical psychologists, social workers)? Best wishes Jim James M. Clark (204) 786-9757 Department of Psychology(204) 774-4134 Fax University of Winnipeg 4L05D Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED] CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Hi Y'all, Rick Adams wrote: While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is inappropriate on the list (discussion of politics or political events in terms of using the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally appropriate), one point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a candidate, not the members. While this make sense rationally, it appears that in these specific political times, the interpretation of this IRS code law is being stretched. Specific warnings were sent and the implication was that if listservs permitted the discussions and electioneering to take place, this served as a violation of the IRS Code. Thus, the simple act of allowing the endorsements to occur constitutes a list endorsement and thus a violation of the code with appropriate penalties. My guess is that this would be particularly true for moderated lists (which we all know TIPS is not!). Additionally, the listserv, depending on its structure, may be deemed as a type of organization-sponsored publication and thus any electioneering could be constituted as a violation of the code. Additionally, many of us use signature files and rarely think about their inclusion at the end of our emails. Note that another IRS publication includes the following (the boldface is mine), "The political campaign activity prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves, as individuals. Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions. To avoid potential attribution of their comments outside of organization functions and publications, organization leaders who speak or write in their individual capacity are encouraged to clearly indicate that their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization." Thus, if individuals do not clarify when arguing for a particular candidate that the views are personal and not representative of the organization listed in the signature file, there could be problems down the road. It is also important to also note that the IRS includes, "Even activities that encourage people to vote for or against a particular candidate on the basis of nonpartisan criteria violate the political campaign prohibition of section 501(c)(3)" as part of its definition of campaign activity. Please be aware that I am not endorsing the policy and am disturbed by the implications in relation to free speech. I personally wonder if the policy is being as actively pursued for all individuals/groups involved. It seems that much of the above has been violated extensively by a number of religious organizations. Best, Linda -- Linda M. Woolf, Ph.D. President-Elect, Peace Psychology Division 48, APA Secretary, Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Div. 2, APA) Professor of Psychology Coordinator - Holocaust & Genocide Studies, Center for the Study of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights Webster University 470 East Lockwood St. Louis, MO 63119 Main Webpage: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's (and woman's) best friend. . . . Inside a dog, it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
jim clark wrote: > >Patricia Spiegel wrote: > > > > This administration is clearly anti-science. > > I wonder if anti-intellectual wouldn't be a better term? I think that it has more to do with how truth is defined. I know that there are all sorts of technical problems with "correspondence theories" (most importantly I guess that it's completely unclear what it would mean for a statement to "correspond" with a state of the world), but I think that ignoring that philosophical nit-picking, we (the typical intellectual/science supporter) holds something that looks a lot like a correspondence theory, in which the truth values of statements are defined by whether or not they properly (slippery word, I know) describe the nature of the world. But I think that the administration and its supporters typically hold a fundamentally different theory of truth, in which the truth value of a statement depends on how it fits with a worldview (often referred to as "the Truth", capital "T"), rather than with the state of the world. Obviously there are plenty of liberals who also ignore certain facts in order to maintain their beliefs (for example, all of the Kerry supporters I heard this week saying some version of "Wait until the debates. When Kerry wins those, it'll give him a boost in the polls!"). But I think that's more a matter of specific motivated denials, or specific instances of ignorance, rather than what seems more and more like a pervasive philosophical position on what makes a statement true or false. Does that make sense? I suppose that it looks exactly the opposite if you're a Bush supporter, but that's my take. Paul Smith, speaking strictly for himself --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Hi Linda, Excellent clarification! >From your comments about sig files and, in particular, about making the fact that an individual is speaking for him or her-self rather than an organization perfectly clear in order to avoid violating the statutes, it would seem that a person who posted a political comment in support of a given candidate (or in opposition to one) would absolve the list of any legal responsibility if his or her sig file contained a statement such as the one I just inserted in mine, below--is that correct? Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not in any way represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:30 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election Hi Y'all, Rick Adams wrote: >While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is >inappropriate on the list (discussion of politics or political events >in terms of using the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally >appropriate), one point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a >candidate, not the members. > > > While this make sense rationally, it appears that in these specific political times, the interpretation of this IRS code law is being stretched. Specific warnings were sent and the implication was that if listservs permitted the discussions and electioneering to take place, this served as a violation of the IRS Code. Thus, the simple act of allowing the endorsements to occur constitutes a list endorsement and thus a violation of the code with appropriate penalties. My guess is that this would be particularly true for moderated lists (which we all know TIPS is not!). Additionally, the listserv, depending on its structure, may be deemed as a type of organization-sponsored publication and thus any electioneering could be constituted as a violation of the code. Additionally, many of us use signature files and rarely think about their inclusion at the end of our emails. Note that another IRS publication includes the following (the boldface is mine), "The political campaign activity prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves, as individuals. Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions. To avoid potential attribution of their comments outside of organization functions and publications, organization leaders who speak or write in their individual capacity are encouraged to clearly indicate that their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization." Thus, if individuals do not clarify when arguing for a particular candidate that the views are personal and not representative of the organization listed in the signature file, there could be problems down the road. It is also important to also note that the IRS includes, "Even activities that encourage people to vote for or against a particular candidate on the basis of nonpartisan criteria violate the political campaign prohibition of section 501(c)(3)" as part of its definition of campaign activity. Please be aware that I am not endorsing the policy and am disturbed by the implications in relation to free speech. I personally wonder if the policy is being as actively pursued for all individuals/groups involved. It seems that much of the above has been violated extensively by a number of religious organizations. Best, Linda --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
I'm in a feisty "evolutionary psychology" mood today, so I am proposing a bold hypothesis: we _should_ occasionally throw in a little non-relevant stuff on discussion groups. As a species, we are accustomed to dealing with the whole person, not just intellectual thoughts. It's nice to know where other person are coming from, what their fault lines are, what we can trust & not trust, etcetera. It makes it easier _trusting_ the group to be kind in response to our posts. Besides, compared to other groups, I think we do an excellent job keeping topics on-target and civil. John W. Kulig Professor of Psychology Plymouth State College Plymouth NH 03264 > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 12:40 PM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: Re: International poll on US election > > On 10 Sep 2004, Claudia Stanny wrote: > > > Given the flexibility of the concept "related directly to teaching," > that I've > > seen on this list, I can imagine a clear relevance of this poll to the > > teaching of psychology. > > One of the things I really appreciate about this list is that it has > no relevancy police, and we depend on our own common sense and > judgement whether something is suitable to post. Given this, I don't > think it's a crime against TIPS to occasionally post something which > we boldly declare (as Chris Green did) has no relevance to the > teaching of psychology. Interesting is more important than relevant. > > Besides, being creative, we can often see a link to teaching, as > Claudia does above, even when the poster him/herself thinks > otherwise. > > Stephen > ___ > Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 > Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 > Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 > Canada > > Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy > TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at > http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm > ___ > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
content disclaimers - Was: International poll on US election
Some institutions (obviously not mine) require such disclaimers in e-mail signatures. I have colleagues on my campus who are required by their department to include such disclaimers. I have often wondered in those institutions where they are required why the disclaimer is not added by the e-mail system such as Yahoo adding their little plug at the bottom. Now for the teaching related part - how far are we from being required to include in our syllabus that what we teach (e.g., evolution) is not endorsed by the institution? And is that appropriate to request of faculty? Doug Doug Peterson, Ph.D. Acting Director of the Honors Program Associate Professor of Psychology 414 E. Clark The University of South Dakota Vermillion SD 57069 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Honors Program: (605) 677-5223 Dept. of Psychology: (605) 677-5295 -Original Message- From: Rick Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:23 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: International poll on US election Hi Linda, Excellent clarification! >From your comments about sig files and, in particular, about making the fact that an individual is speaking for him or her-self rather than an organization perfectly clear in order to avoid violating the statutes, it would seem that a person who posted a political comment in support of a given candidate (or in opposition to one) would absolve the list of any legal responsibility if his or her sig file contained a statement such as the one I just inserted in mine, below--is that correct? Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not in any way represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:30 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election Hi Y'all, Rick Adams wrote: >While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is >inappropriate on the list (discussion of politics or political events >in terms of using the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally >appropriate), one point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a >candidate, not the members. > > > While this make sense rationally, it appears that in these specific political times, the interpretation of this IRS code law is being stretched. Specific warnings were sent and the implication was that if listservs permitted the discussions and electioneering to take place, this served as a violation of the IRS Code. Thus, the simple act of allowing the endorsements to occur constitutes a list endorsement and thus a violation of the code with appropriate penalties. My guess is that this would be particularly true for moderated lists (which we all know TIPS is not!). Additionally, the listserv, depending on its structure, may be deemed as a type of organization-sponsored publication and thus any electioneering could be constituted as a violation of the code. Additionally, many of us use signature files and rarely think about their inclusion at the end of our emails. Note that another IRS publication includes the following (the boldface is mine), "The political campaign activity prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves, as individuals. Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions. To avoid potential attribution of their comments outside of organization functions and publications, organization leaders who speak or write in their individual capacity are encouraged to clearly indicate that their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization." Thus, if individuals do not clarify when arguing for a particular candidate that the views are personal and not representative of the organization listed in the signature file, there could be problems down the road. It is also important to also note that the IRS includes, "Even activities that encourage people to vote for or against a particular candidate on the basis of nonpartisan criteria violate the political campaign prohibition of section 501(c)(3)" as part of its definition of campaign activity. Please be aw
Re: International poll on US election
I would guess that in 20 years research support will be faith-based and the power of Christian prayer will have been shown a useful adjunct if not a primary alternative to most traditional health care. Non-Christian prayer may be considered dangerous. Other alternative treatments/healings will be available by voucher to those who can show sufficient belief in deities of some kindlike the apa. New treatments from Canada will be suspect. The president (Arnold) will be on Jay Leno touting a proposed policy to allow only special food marshals to carry guns in restaurants as long as they wear pin-stripe T-shirts. Yea, it's Friday. Gary Peterson Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. Professor, Psychology Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI 48710 989-964-4491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/10/2004 12:42:12 PM >>> OK, I will jump in one more time with my question and ask if this is relevant to teaching. This administration is clearly anti-science. As Chris Matthews has said, "Do you want the same diseases in 20 years? Then who to vote for is clear." My colleagues at NIH are very concerned. There is a move afoot to pull already approved grants for political reasons. NIH is scheduled for a very short increase (far lower than needed to keep up with inflation, and that small budget is earmarked for bioterrorism research). Scientific findings are misrepresented to the public to fit political agendas (and there is incredibly good documentation for that assertion.) One colleague said that we are entering an ice-age of science, and unless strong support continues fewer scientists will want to enter the research field. Stem cell research is VERY controversial for good reason, but one candidate does indicate that tight standards would apply and only to-be discarded blastocysts would be used whereas the current administration does allow a few already existing lines to be used, but there is concern that many are contaminated with mouse blood. And I could go on...but my purpose is truly not to advance a certain candidate, although I, of course, do so in the process of sounding an alert that I DO think is relevant to teaching behavioral scientists and our students who are interested in a science career. Patricia Keith-Spiegel - Original Message - From: "Rick Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:18 AM Subject: RE: International poll on US election > Hi Linda, > > While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is inappropriate > on the list (discussion of politics or political events in terms of using > the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally appropriate), one > point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a > candidate, not the members. If, for example, my sig file were to endorse > Kerry & Edwards--or if I posted a message that endorsed Nadar (I won't > even consider the alternative example hypothetically :-), it would have no > effect on the non-profit status of the list or the institution hosting it > at all. That falls under the protection of free speech on the part of the > list members. On the other hand, if Bill--speaking as listowner instead of > as a member of the list--were to endorse a candidate for office, there > could be a problem as a result. Thus I can argue that Nadar would make a > better President from an environmentalist's standpoint, Louis could argue > that Kerry would make a better President from an historic perspective, and > Michael Sylvester could argue that Bush would make a better President > because he isn't Eurocentric (he obviously doesn't like Europeans either > :-), and it would be legally--if not contextually--acceptable. > > In practice, we're all better off if we leave personal politics at home > when we discuss issues on the list--unless they apply to the teaching of > our classes or to our research, of course. But, on the other hand, > "leaving politics at home" is something we've never done here--such > political topics as discrimination, minority rights, Eurocentrism, etc. > have traditionally been discussed here as well--and there's really no > difference in those discussions than in ones dealing with International > views on Kerry and Bush. > > Rick > > > -- > > Rick Adams > Capella University School of Technology > Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. > Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love > you leave behind when you're gone." > -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 11:32 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: Re: International poll on US election > > Hi Y'all, > > Politically related discussions may have a place
RE: International poll on US election
Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T be elected President of the United States! :-) Pat Robertson, on the other hand . . . :-( Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they necessarily represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Gerald Peterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:53 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election I would guess that in 20 years research support will be faith-based and the power of Christian prayer will have been shown a useful adjunct if not a primary alternative to most traditional health care. Non-Christian prayer may be considered dangerous. Other alternative treatments/healings will be available by voucher to those who can show sufficient belief in deities of some kindlike the apa. New treatments from Canada will be suspect. The president (Arnold) will be on Jay Leno touting a proposed policy to allow only special food marshals to carry guns in restaurants as long as they wear pin-stripe T-shirts. Yea, it's Friday. Gary Peterson Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. Professor, Psychology Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI 48710 989-964-4491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
on 9/10/2004 3:00 PM Rick Adams said the following: Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T be elected President of the United States! :-) I guess you didn't hear about the recent movement in the Republican party (led by Orrin Hatch) to amend the Constitution to allow people who became naturalized U.S. citizens more than 20 years ago to be elected president. Hey, wasn't Arnold naturalized about 20 years ago? I wonder if that's a coincidence . . . Jeff (speaking for himself only, etc.) -- Jeffrey Bartel Assistant Professor Department of Psychology, FSC 227 Shippensburg University Shippensburg, PA 17257 jsbart @ wharf.ship.edu / 717.477.1324 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
This is so black and white for a critical thinker. You have heard of amendments to the Constitution, right? Rick Dr. Rick Froman Professor of Psychology John Brown University 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (479) 524-7295 http://www.jbu.edu/academics/sbs/faculty/rfroman.asp -Original Message- From: Rick Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:00 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: International poll on US election Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T be elected President of the United States! :-) Pat Robertson, on the other hand . . . :-( Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they necessarily represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Gerald Peterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:53 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election I would guess that in 20 years research support will be faith-based and the power of Christian prayer will have been shown a useful adjunct if not a primary alternative to most traditional health care. Non-Christian prayer may be considered dangerous. Other alternative treatments/healings will be available by voucher to those who can show sufficient belief in deities of some kindlike the apa. New treatments from Canada will be suspect. The president (Arnold) will be on Jay Leno touting a proposed policy to allow only special food marshals to carry guns in restaurants as long as they wear pin-stripe T-shirts. Yea, it's Friday. Gary Peterson Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D. Professor, Psychology Saginaw Valley State University University Center, MI 48710 989-964-4491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Hi Y'all, Rick Adams wrote: Hi Linda, Excellent clarification! From your comments about sig files and, in particular, about making the fact that an individual is speaking for him or her-self rather than an organization perfectly clear in order to avoid violating the statutes, it would seem that a person who posted a political comment in support of a given candidate (or in opposition to one) would absolve the list of any legal responsibility if his or her sig file contained a statement such as the one I just inserted in mine, below--is that correct? No, the removal of the signature tag only absolves the organization listed in your signature tag of which you are a leader. It is unclear whether the list would be absolved as it may still be considered a "publication" of the list and its organization. The statute is clear that if candidates are brought into a public forum or if speakers about candidates (or non-partisan issues that directly favor a particular candidate) are brought into a public forum than a balance between the candidates must be present. If the scale tips in favor of a particular candidate in that forum, then the IRS code has been violated. TIPS is probably a safe place to electioneer away as it is only provided server space through Frostburg. If Frostburg were approached about a problem on the list related to electioneering, they could remedy and distance themselves quite quickly by shutting it down. TIPS doesn't have any organizational structure as a non-profit so it is in the clear. However, other lists sponsored by organizations may be at risk. For example, the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology has a list called PeacePsych. According to some of the IRS warnings, the organization is at risk if a post goes to the list that either directly supports a particular candidate or indirectly supports a candidate by discussing a partisan-related issue. It is considered a "publication" of the Society. As such, the organizational home of the listserv may lose its non-profit status and be subject to penalty. Yes, even though winter is a few months away, I feel a chill in the air. Linda -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not in any way represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Linda Woolf, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:30 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: International poll on US election Hi Y'all, Rick Adams wrote: While I agree that endorsement of a particular candidate is inappropriate on the list (discussion of politics or political events in terms of using the material in a teaching context is, to me, totally appropriate), one point to consider is that it is the list ITSELF that must not endorse a candidate, not the members. While this make sense rationally, it appears that in these specific political times, the interpretation of this IRS code law is being stretched. Specific warnings were sent and the implication was that if listservs permitted the discussions and electioneering to take place, this served as a violation of the IRS Code. Thus, the simple act of allowing the endorsements to occur constitutes a list endorsement and thus a violation of the code with appropriate penalties. My guess is that this would be particularly true for moderated lists (which we all know TIPS is not!). Additionally, the listserv, depending on its structure, may be deemed as a type of organization-sponsored publication and thus any electioneering could be constituted as a violation of the code. Additionally, many of us use signature files and rarely think about their inclusion at the end of our emails. Note that another IRS publication includes the following (the boldface is mine), "The political campaign activity prohibition is not intended to restrict free expression on political matters by leaders of organizations speaking for themselves, as individuals. Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions. To avoid potential attribution of their comments outside of organization functions and publications, organization leaders who speak or write in their individual capacity are encouraged to clearly indicate that their comm
Isn't it all political? - Was: International poll on US election
So much of what we do while teaching psychology has political implications. In my research methods class last week, I was in the middle of a discussion of the characteristics of scientific thought: tolerance for ambiguity, willingness to consider multiple interpretations of findings, etc. When I got to the part about acceptance that the world is not black-and-white and that an answer that seems correct today might not be considered correct 10 years from now, a joke about the "scientist as flip-flopper" flashed into my head. Looking around the room, I wondered if the grins on some faces suggested that the same idea might be percolating up in a few other heads. I was sorely tempted, but I decided that the self-generated thought might be more powerful than my giving it explicit voice. When you teach in an extremely conservative community, basic ideas and values in psychology (evolution, not beating children, questioning authority figures, etc.) take on a political charge in the blink of an eye. Students often want to isolate their religious and political beliefs from classroom content. We need to confront and challenge these beliefs - isn't that what education is all about? Just another liberal educator ranting ... speaking for myself ... ;-) Claudia Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Associate Professor Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/ General Track Coordinator Department of PsychologyPhone: (850) 474 - 3163 University of West Florida FAX:(850) 857 - 6060 Pensacola, FL 32514 - 5751 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Rick- Not so fast. You mean Arnold can't be elected without a constitutional amendment. :) It isn't impossible but not allowed under the current constitution for citizens not born in the USA to be elected president. Tim Shearon _ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Albertson College of Idaho 2112 Cleveland Blvd. Caldwell, ID 83605 [EMAIL PROTECTED] teaching: History and systems; Intro to Neuropsychology; Child Development; Physiological Psychology; Psychology and Cinema -Original Message- From: Rick Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:00 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: International poll on US election Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T be elected President of the United States! :-) Pat Robertson, on the other hand . . Rick --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
totally different question
OK, I'm admitting my ignorance of language here (especially German), but there is something I can't figure out and it bugs me. Why do people sometimes pronounce Alzheimer's Disease "All-timer's" Disease (I'm not talking about the old joke of Old-Timer's)? This is just one of those minor irritations, but I've heard so many people do this that I'm wondering if maybe they aren't wrong after all; maybe it's an alternative pronunciation that I'm not familiar with. Can anyone help me out with this? Carol --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Isn't it all political? - Was: International poll on US election
Claudia Stanny wrote: > Just another liberal educator ranting ... speaking for myself ... ;-) So an ad like this might not go over well at your institution? http://www.n3t.net/humor/Seriously.mpg Paul Smith (speaking for myself) <>--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Isn't it all political? - Was: International poll on US election
I think critical thinking should mean that we are as willing to use our powers of critical thinking to analyze our own beliefs as we are to use it in the service of attacking the beliefs of others. I wonder if any of us are very good role models of that or if all of our encouragement to critical thinking is aimed at showing our students how my critically-based conclusions are superior to their superstition-based beliefs. Certainly, if everyone thought critically, they would all believe like me. I am currently in the process of laying the groundwork for developing a critical thinking test to measure the effect of various critical thinking skills taught in Core classes on our students' critical thinking skills. I plan to get two scores for each discipline: one in which they use their critical thinking skills (as taught in that discipline) in a way that is consonant with their beliefs and one in which they use their critical thinking skills to critique their own beliefs. In political terms, for example, I would have them critique statements attributed to John Kerry or George Bush looking for logical flaws. I assume Republicans will find more flaws with Kerry and Democrats will find more flaws with Bush. I think they will probably score higher on the belief-consonant use of critical thinking than they will on the belief-discrepant use but I hope that that gap can be reduced over subsequent years. Rick Dr. Rick Froman Professor of Psychology John Brown University 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (479) 524-7295 http://www.jbu.edu/academics/sbs/faculty/rfroman.asp -Original Message- From: Claudia Stanny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 3:22 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Isn't it all political? - Was: International poll on US election So much of what we do while teaching psychology has political implications. In my research methods class last week, I was in the middle of a discussion of the characteristics of scientific thought: tolerance for ambiguity, willingness to consider multiple interpretations of findings, etc. When I got to the part about acceptance that the world is not black-and-white and that an answer that seems correct today might not be considered correct 10 years from now, a joke about the "scientist as flip-flopper" flashed into my head. Looking around the room, I wondered if the grins on some faces suggested that the same idea might be percolating up in a few other heads. I was sorely tempted, but I decided that the self-generated thought might be more powerful than my giving it explicit voice. When you teach in an extremely conservative community, basic ideas and values in psychology (evolution, not beating children, questioning authority figures, etc.) take on a political charge in the blink of an eye. Students often want to isolate their religious and political beliefs from classroom content. We need to confront and challenge these beliefs - isn't that what education is all about? Just another liberal educator ranting ... speaking for myself ... ;-) Claudia Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Associate Professor Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/ General Track Coordinator Department of PsychologyPhone: (850) 474 - 3163 University of West Florida FAX:(850) 857 - 6060 Pensacola, FL 32514 - 5751 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Isn't it all political? - Was: International poll on US election
Rick Froman wrote: > I plan to get two scores for each discipline: one in > which they use their critical thinking skills (as taught in that > discipline) in a way that is consonant with their beliefs and one in > which they use their critical thinking skills to critique their own > beliefs. I have to mention again my favorite book on this topic, Deanna Kuhn's "The Skills of Argument". It describes a large study of this sort of thing that she did with a number of different samples (adolescent/20s/40s/60s, college-educated/non-college-educated, men/women, subject matter experts/non-subject matter experts/philosophy Ph.D.s). She asked them to express their theories about certain topics (e.g., why some children succeed in school and others don't), defend them, explain how they might be refuted, express alternative theories, identify evidence that might support those, etc. Paul Smith Alverno College Milwaukee <>--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: totally different question
The Z in German is most correctly pronounced as a ts sound and in zimmer (room) being pronounced tsimmer. Some people are sloppy and I could see how all-timers could sound close. Dr. Bob Wildlbood Lecturer in Psychology Indiana University Kokomo Kokomo, IN 56904-9003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 10 Sep, 2004, at 15:37, DeVolder Carol L wrote: OK, I'm admitting my ignorance of language here (especially German), but there is something I can't figure out and it bugs me. Why do people sometimes pronounce Alzheimer's Disease "All-timer's" Disease (I'm not talking about the old joke of Old-Timer's)? This is just one of those minor irritations, but I've heard so many people do this that I'm wondering if maybe they aren't wrong after all; maybe it's an alternative pronunciation that I'm not familiar with. Can anyone help me out with this? Carol --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: General Psyc non-lecture
You might also look at a Great Books version I have done (but not for a few years. You can find it at: http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/classes/Intro/index.html -Chuck Do any of you TIPSTERS teach General Psychology (Intro) in a way that uses no lecture (or only a tiny bit of lecture)? I am thinking about restructuring this course in a radical way, but only have a hazy vision of where I might go. I have 50 students/section, so there is a good deal of flexibility. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Lenore Frigo Shasta College Redding, CA see http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~allanr/psi.html on the PSI method. -- * PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * *http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html* --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directly related to Psychology
See http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/10/opinion/10bloom.html For an OpEd article on dualism. As an old monist, I'll vote against it ;-) -- * PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED] * Very fun article. Bloom says "The great conflict between science and religion in the last century was over evolutionary biology. In this century, it will be over psychology, and the stakes are nothing less than our souls." At the risk of starting up the science religion controversy on this list again (run away!!), I will ask: What specifically is it about modern psychology that will produce this conflict? For evolutionary biology it was showing that a special creation was not necessary to get complexity or diversity in life. What will bring the psych-religion conflict to a head? Will it be when we reach a point with neuroscience models of consciousness that we can be clear that there is no single executive module? Anyone else have candidates for the challenger? I can't imagine that a simple methodological monism will do it -- that's been around for some time. -Chuck -- - Chuck Huff;http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/ - Department of Psychology, St. Olaf College --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Psychology and terrorism
I received the following from Scott Plous. This short article from the Chronicle along with information from some of the links on Social Psychology Network could form the basis of an informative class segment on psychology and terrorism. --Dave I'm writing to let you know of an article that Phil Zimbardo and I published in today's issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education: "How Social Science Can Reduce Terrorism." To read or download a copy, please visit: http://www.socialpsychology.org/pdf/chronicle04.pdf [PDF] or http://chronicle.com/free/v51/i03/03b00901.htm [HTML] For the highly motivated, there are also some related links at: http://www.socialpsychology.org/peace.htm ___ David E. Campbell, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Psychology Phone: 707-826-3721 Humboldt State University FAX: 707-826-4993 Arcata, CA 95521-8299 www.humboldt.edu/~campbell/psyc.htm --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Germ Study Suggests Bloodletting May Work
So you thought that "bleeding" as a treatment for illness was nothing but a pre-modern superstition, did you? http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=624&u=/ap/20040910/ap_on_sc/iron_bacteria&printer=1 -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164 fax: 416-736-5814 http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ . Title: Yahoo! News - Germ Study Suggests Bloodletting May Work News Home - Help Germ Study Suggests Bloodletting May Work Thu Sep 9, 9:22 PM ET By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer WASHINGTON - Could that ancient practice of bleeding patients really have done some good? A scientist says new research on how germs thrive in the body suggests it just may have — for some people. Bacteria need iron to cause infections. The body has defense mechanisms to make it harder for germs to suck iron out of someone's blood or other tissues. But deadly germs can get around that so-called iron blockade, and understanding how might lead to better treatments. University of Chicago microbiologists report Thursday in the journal Science that the staph germ — a leading cause of pneumonia and other infections — fuels itself with iron in a previously unknown way. Early in staph infections, the germs blow open red blood cells. The Chicago researchers found staph then snatches their oxygen- and iron-carrying component, called heme, and discovered the genes that govern the process. When they weakened those genes, staph no longer sickened worms or mice, said lead researcher Eric P. Skaar. Next step is hunting drugs to block staph's iron-stealing ability. Where does that ancient remedy of bloodletting come in? The discovery suggests that bloodletting, done early enough, may have slowed staph infections by starving germs of iron, National Institutes of Health (news - web sites) iron specialist Tracy Rouault wrote in a review of Skaar's research. Nobody's suggesting bleeding staph patients today. Now derided as a nonsensical if not barbaric custom, bloodletting was abandoned in the mid-20th century after antibiotics were invented. But the mystery persists: "How could a procedure popular for 2,500 years have really been completely worthless?" Rouault asked. Bloodletting was used for lots of reasons, many that "didn't make good sense," she stressed. But, searching old medical texts, she found that starting in 18th-century France, certain physicians advised it only at the start of a high-fever illness. Even in 1942, medicine's leading English-language textbook advised early bleeding for high-fever pneumonia. That can certainly describe a bad staph infection. Moreover, Rouault notes that one treatment for a different disease, malaria, is a drug that lowers iron in blood. Story Tools Email Story Post/Read Msgs (152) Formatted Story Ratings: Would you recommend this story? Not at all 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 Highly Copyright © 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Copyright © 2004 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.Questions or CommentsPrivacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright Policy - Ad Feedback --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General Psyc non-lecture
Thank you for sharing. I will take a look. -Lenore -Original Message- From: Chuck Huff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:41 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: General Psyc non-lecture You might also look at a Great Books version I have done (but not for a few years. You can find it at: http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/classes/Intro/index.html -Chuck >>Do any of you TIPSTERS teach General Psychology (Intro) in a way >>that uses no lecture (or only a tiny bit of lecture)? I am thinking >>about restructuring this course in a radical way, but only have a >>hazy vision of where I might go. I have 50 students/section, so >>there is a good deal of flexibility. Any thoughts would be >>appreciated. >> >>Lenore Frigo >>Shasta College >>Redding, CA >> > >see >http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~allanr/psi.html >on the PSI method. >-- >* PAUL K. BRANDON[EMAIL PROTECTED] * >* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * >* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * >*http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html* > >--- >You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Directly related to Psychology--and religion
Chuck Huff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At the risk of starting up the science religion controversy on this list again (run away!!), I will ask: What specifically is it about modern psychology that will produce this conflict? For evolutionary biology it was showing that a special creation was not necessary to get complexity or diversity in life.What will bring the psych-religion conflict to a head? Will it be when we reach a point with neuroscience models of consciousness that we can be clear that there is no single executive module? Anyone else have candidates for the challenger? I can't imagine that a simple methodological monism will do it -- that's been around for some time. Chuck-- I agree that this NYT article was good. I'm debating using it in my general-psych class as an introduction to the "brain & biology" unit. (I'm thinking of not using it only because I'm slamming them with enough outside reading as it is, not because it's potentially controversial!) If I may refine your wording just a bit, though, I think what you are predicting is more properly defined as a conflict between psychology and religious fundamentalism, not religion per se. The fundamentalists may be loud, but they are not the only members of religion's big tent, and they are not even the most numerous. While most of the people who oppose the teaching of evolution do so on religious grounds, many--possibly most--religious people do subscribe to the theory of evolution. Catholics, for example (at least those who listen to the Vatican on the issue). Far too many scientists--particularly those in the social sciences, who ought to know better about ingroup/outgroup bias, self-fulfilling prophecy, groupthink, and all sorts of other tricks our minds can play on us--are eager to caricature all religious folk as fundamentalists. 'Tain't necessarily so. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go pour some wine and light some candles ...Shabbat shalom! Robin Notices at the bottom of this e-mail do not reflect the opinions of the sender. I do not "yahoo" that I am aware of. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Sure, but both parties oppose one that would permit someone born outside the US to serve as President. On the Democratic side, they fear that a staunch conservative (Arnold) would be elected, on the Republican side they fear a liberal. BOTH sides fear the reaction of the very sizable voting block who are "Born American" and would vote out of office anyone who dared to suggest that someone not born here should be President (and, yes, there HAS been research conducted to support this argument--several PoliSci studies demonstrate it [I teach PoliSci as well as Psych & Soc and run across them frequently]). It's like drug legalization and regulation (for adults)--every rational person knows it's the only way to reduce drug use (by eliminating the profit motive from dealing), and every rational voter knows that marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol (not to say it isn't harmful--just not MORE harmful)--but find a politician above the level of city council willing to publicly take that position! Never confuse critical thinking with politics--that's like confusing rationality with extreme fundamentalism or racial acceptance with the KKK! Rick -- Rick Adams Capella University School of Technology Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences [EMAIL PROTECTED] "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love you leave behind when you're gone." -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not necessarily represent the views of any organization or institution with which I may be associated, nor do they necessarily represent the views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. -Original Message- From: Rick Froman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 3:24 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: International poll on US election This is so black and white for a critical thinker. You have heard of amendments to the Constitution, right? Rick Dr. Rick Froman Professor of Psychology John Brown University 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (479) 524-7295 http://www.jbu.edu/academics/sbs/faculty/rfroman.asp -Original Message- From: Rick Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:00 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: RE: International poll on US election Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T be elected President of the United States! :-) Pat Robertson, on the other hand . . . :-( --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: International poll on US election
Rick Adams wrote: It's like drug legalization and regulation (for adults)--every rational person knows it's the only way to reduce drug use (by eliminating the profit motive from dealing), and every rational voter knows that marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol (not to say it isn't harmful--just not MORE harmful)--but find a politician above the level of city council willing to publicly take that position! An interesting, and quite contrary, thing happened in Canada last year. The then-Justice Minister, Martin Cauchon, was bringing forward marijuana decriminalization legislation. During a press scrum, some reporter *thinking he could stir up trouble, no doubt) asked if Cauchon had ever smoked marijuana when he was younger. The minister snapped off "of course," with a tone that implicitly said of the reporter something along the lines of, "What kind of a dope are you?" The exchange was broadcast that night on the national news, most people had a good chuckle, and that was about the last that anyone ever heard about it. In the US, things would have been quite different of course (remember the great ruckus caused by Clinton's "I didn't inhale."remark?). The then-Prime Minister, Jean Cretien, dissolved parliament (over other matters entirely) before the legislation came to a vote and so marijuana is still not decriminalized in Canada. Regards, -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164 fax: 416-736-5814 http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ . --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Christopher D. Green wrote: > During a press scrum, some > reporter *thinking he could stir up trouble, no doubt) asked if Cauchon > had ever smoked marijuana when he was younger. The minister snapped off > "of course," with a tone that implicitly said of the reporter something > along the lines of, "What kind of a dope are you?" The exchange was > broadcast that night on the national news, most people had a good > chuckle, and that was about the last that anyone ever heard about it. In > the US, things would have been quite different of course (remember the > great ruckus caused by Clinton's "I didn't inhale."remark?). Well, actually this is a rare example of the U.S. media acting in a mature way: early in the 2000 campaign Al Gore freely admitted to having smoked (and inhaled ) marijuana, and no-one ever made a big deal about it. If there were people for whom Gore's experience with marijuana was a big deal in the 2000 election, they didn't get a lot of press. Of course that may be because unlike President Clinton, Al Gore faced an opponent who had a history of serious drug abuse, and therefore who decided that wasn't the best topic on which to base campaign attacks. I always thought that President Clinton made a big mistake by not just simply saying that he'd tried it - the "I didn't inhale" line sounded like he was trying to have it both ways. But in his autobiography he explains that he really meant to emphasize the fact that he wasn't good at inhaling smoke (something I understand very well), not to pretend to have smoked but not really _smoked_. I wish I could find the explanation to give you a quote, but his book is 950 pages long, and for some mysterious reason the word "marijuana" doesn't appear in the index. I can't for the life of me imagine why it's not in there. Anyway, I'm no longer so sure that it was a lame attempt to defuse the issue: I think it might have been a naive attempt to tell the truth. On the other side, of course, we have Bush's strategy: simply refuse to answer the question. I doubt that either President Clinton or Al Gore would have been allowed (by the media) to get away with that, of course. Paul Smith (speaking for himself, and 100% drug-free except for this glass of Cotes de Provence, which I drank slowly with dinner, and did not inhale) <>--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: International poll on US election
Hi Rick- you said in part, "every rational voter knows that marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol (not to say it isn't harmful--just not MORE harmful)--but find a politician above the level of city council willing to publicly take that position!" Mayor Larry Campbell of Vancouver has taken just that position. He open;y advocates the legalization of marijuana. There aren't many sensible politicians out there, but there are a few. -Don. Rick Adams said: > Sure, but both parties oppose one that would permit someone born outside > the US to serve as President. On the Democratic side, they fear that a > staunch conservative (Arnold) would be elected, on the Republican > side they fear a liberal. BOTH sides fear the reaction of the very > sizable voting block who are "Born American" and would vote out of > office anyone who dared to suggest that someone not born here should be > President (and, yes, there HAS been research conducted to support this > argument--several PoliSci studies demonstrate it [I teach PoliSci as > well as Psych & Soc and run across them frequently]). It's like drug > legalization and regulation (for adults)--every rational person knows > it's the only way to reduce drug use (by eliminating the profit motive > from dealing), and every rational voter knows that marijuana is no more > harmful than alcohol (not to say it isn't harmful--just not MORE > harmful)--but find a politician above the level of city council willing > to publicly take that position! > > Never confuse critical thinking with politics--that's like confusing > rationality with extreme fundamentalism or racial acceptance with the > KKK! > > Rick > > > -- > > Rick Adams > Capella University School of Technology > Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences. > Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love > you leave behind when you're gone." > -Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible" > > NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do > not necessarily represent the views of any organization or institution > with which I may be associated, nor do they necessarily represent the > views or values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear. > > > -Original Message- > From: Rick Froman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 3:24 PM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: RE: International poll on US election > > This is so black and white for a critical thinker. You have heard of > amendments to the Constitution, right? > > Rick > > Dr. Rick Froman > Professor of Psychology > John Brown University > 2000 W. University > Siloam Springs, AR 72761 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (479) 524-7295 > http://www.jbu.edu/academics/sbs/faculty/rfroman.asp > > > -Original Message- > From: Rick Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:00 PM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences > Subject: RE: International poll on US election > > Happily, your prediction can't come to pass (verily I say . . .). > > Arnold was not born in the USA, and thus under the Constitution he CAN'T > be elected President of the United States! :-) > > Pat Robertson, on the other hand . . . :-( > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
