NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/talk/abortion/57664

Text File | 1993-01-24 | 5.7 KB | 119 lines

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx!mcochran
From: [e-mail] (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
    of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
    control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Sender: [e-mail] (netnews admin account)
Organization: None worth mentioning.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 06:01:52 GMT
Lines: 104

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>
>>>>>>>>>
>> long time ago, and many attribution lines away, I wrote:
>>>>>>>>Nope, not at all Kebbin. I admited it was a poor answer when I replied
>>>>>>>>to another article in this thread. I also corrected the mistaken
>>>>>>>>answer to include examples of people carrying on conversation while
>>>>>>>>sleeping, quite intelligently. One example I used was that of a
>>>>>>>>hematologist I had occasion to discuss a patient with at 2AM. He was
>>>>>>>>quite responsive, and remembered none of it the next day. He stated
>>>>>>>>that he must have slept right through the conversation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>No Kebbin, I said "he stated he must have slept right through the
>>>>conversation"
>>>
>>>You also said "He ... remembered none of it the next day". I merely repeated
>>>what you said, with a speculation as to the cause.
>>>
>>Which merely proves that you are incapable of reading the entire
>>paragraph.
>
>Mindless comment. Obviously I read the entire paragraph.
>
And totally failed to comprehend it. Have you signed up for that
remedial English course yet?

>>>>You squirm very nicly Kebbin. Now just admit that you're wrong.
>>>
>>>If I was "wrong" [sic], it's only because you gave me incorrect information,
>>>namely, that the hematologist "remembered none of it the next day". If you
>>>want to point a finger of blame, point it at yourself.
>>>
>>Further proof that the problem lies in your inability to read an
>>entire paragraph, and comprehend it. Try reading it again.
>
>Blather.
>
Oh come on Kebbin, you're trying to claim now that 'remembered none of
it the next day' is 'incorrect' information? How so, when it is a
repitition of what was said to me? As I said before, work on your
reading skills little boy.

>>>>The fact that schizophrenia is not the same thing as MPD, no matter
>>>>how much you try to pretend it is.
>>>
>>>The common meaning of the term "schizophrenia" >>IS<< the same as the
>>>medical acronym "MPD". They denote exactly the same thing.
>>>
>>So, according to Kevin "Lets be precise in our terminology' Darcy, the
>>ignorance (according to your claim) about the meaning of the word
>>within the general population is your excuse for displaying yoru own
>>ignorance?
>
>I use terms that people will understand, Mark. "Schizophrenia" is understood
>by most people the same way "MPD" is understood by the Medical Elite. But
>since we have, as far as I know, only one member of the Medical Elite in the
>audience, I used the term mostly likely to be understood by the most people.
>That's not "wrong"; it's just an attempt to facilitate communication.
>
If this were true, then there would have been questions raised when I
initially corrected you about the term 'multiple personality disorder'
long before I shortened it to MPD for convenience. There was none, so
I am forced to conclude that most people understand the phrase
'multiple personality disorder' quite well. You seem to be the only
one operating under the misbelief that they are synonomous. Doesn't
fit in well with your self styled image as 'lets keep the language
tight' Darcy, does it?
For that matter, I understood the difference *long* before I had any
formal medical training (as in, way back in high school) so I really
find it hard to believe that proper usage is limited to the 'medical
elite' as you claim.
Keep squirming Kibble...

>>>>Which does not change your error into a correct usage of the word
>>>>schizophrenia. Cut is medically correct in the same sense that girl is
>>>>medically correct for a young female. This is an accepted usage of the
>>>>word. Schizophrenia is never correct when used to describe MPD, as you
>>>>used it.
>>>
>>>I never said "schizophrenia" was "medically" correct, Mark. Are you such
>>>a medico-geek that you can't see the rest of the world that exists outside
>>>of the medical realm? According to the OED, "schizophrenia" has, in general
>>>usage, the meaning I gave it. T.S. Eliot and George Orwell have used it in
>>>the same way I did. It may be "incorrect" in Stethoscope-Land, Mark, but
>>>the word can have a different meaning in other contexts.
>>>
>>So it is your desire to foster and encourage the incorrect usage of
>>words. Thank you for admitting that Kevin. It says volumes about you.
>
>Stop trying to impose the jargon of the Medical Elite on the rest of the
>population.
>
Is this the same Kibble that has criticized other so often for 'loose
language', who now tries desperately to defend his own incorrect
usage, when a simple admition of error would clear it up?

--
                  Mark Cochran          [e-mail]
These are the views of my employer, your employer, your government, the
Church of your choice, and the Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Member, T.S.A.K.C.