xmcamail.9906: Re: Dolly and beyond

------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BEB593.0262C540
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

"If the "mentally ill" cannot or will not respond to, or even seek out, =
help from neurology's chemicalia, then _they'll_ be responsible. It'll =
be their own fault, their own problem, and they'll have to take the =
blame. Eventually, this must manifest itself in the most inhumane =
decisions for those who cannot cope with life. I seem to recall that =
Clinton took time off from his first presidential hustings to expedite =
the execution of a mentally disabled person in Arkansas."

I think it goes beyond individual to social responsibility, but then =
that usually amounts to the same thing. A child who can't sit still is =
in need of some sort of chemical assistance. If a parent objects they =
are seen as suspect, even to the extent of being abusive for not =
agreeing to such chemical enhancement. I found the Learning Mystique by =
Coles as an interesting historical tracing of the use of drugs/chemicals =
in education. Much of the "objective" knowledge which current research =
in built upon is very shaky. Many of the original studies were very =
badly done. Coles repeats many of the original research using some of =
Luria's tests.

I do however, think we need to be mutually concerned with determinism on =
the other end. So often in the medical/health literature an effect from =
multiple causes become a determiner of a particular cause. For =
example, an abused child may be angry, shy, etc, but this does not imply =
if I run into a shy or angry child they have been abused. I see both =
social/biological determinism as having more in common than different. =
In education they seem to be very compatible with each other. A child =
not conforming or fitting the particular mold (active or passive) is =
explained either through social or biological determinism. It is either =
that awful environment does not permit him to learn (conform) or the =
child needs certain chemicals so he can concentrate on the particular =
tasks.

It doesn't seem to matter if the determinism, to go back to the frogs, =
is because of the environment (wrong kind of bucket) or biology or =
genetics (frogs need some Ritalin), in the end it is our desire to have =
simple solutions for complicated processes.=20

------=_NextPart_000_0025_01BEB593.0262C540
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

"If the "mentally ill" cannot or will = not respond=20 to, or even seek out, help from neurology's chemicalia, then _they'll_ = be=20 responsible. It'll be their own fault, their own problem, and they'll = have to=20 take the blame. Eventually, this must manifest itself in the most = inhumane=20 decisions for those who cannot cope with life. I seem to recall that = Clinton=20 took time off from his first presidential hustings to expedite the = execution of=20 a mentally disabled person in Arkansas."

I think it goes beyond individual to = social=20 responsibility, but then that usually amounts to the same thing. A = child=20 who can't sit still is in need of some sort of chemical = assistance. If a=20 parent objects they are seen as suspect, even to the extent of = being=20 abusive for not agreeing to such chemical enhancement. I found the = Learning Mystique by Coles as an interesting historical = tracing of=20 the use of drugs/chemicals in education. Much of the "objective" = knowledge=20 which current research in built upon is very shaky. Many of = the=20 original studies were very badly done. Coles repeats many of = the=20 original research using some of Luria's tests.

I do however, think we need to be = mutually=20 concerned with determinism on the other end. So often in the=20 medical/health literature an effect from multiple causes become a=20 determiner of a particular cause. For example, an abused child = may be=20 angry, shy, etc, but this does not imply if I run into a shy or angry = child they=20 have been abused. I see both social/biological determinism as = having=20 more in common than different. In education they seem to be very = compatible with=20 each other. A child not conforming or fitting the particular mold = (active=20 or passive) is explained either through social or biological=20 determinism. It is either that awful environment does not = permit him=20 to learn (conform) or the child needs certain chemicals so he can=20 concentrate on the particular tasks.

It doesn't seem to matter if = the=20 determinism, to go back to the frogs, is because of the environment = (wrong kind=20 of bucket) or biology or genetics (frogs need some Ritalin), in the end = it is=20 our desire to have simple solutions for complicated processes. =