Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxr.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Can John Brown be far behind? Message-ID: <242@mhuxr.UUCP> Date: Mon, 11-Feb-85 16:23:59 EST Article-I.D.: mhuxr.242 Posted: Mon Feb 11 16:23:59 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Feb-85 06:17:48 EST References: <330@decwrl.UUCP> <28000033@uiucdcsb.UUCP> <221@mhuxr.UUCP> <318@ccice6.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 21 > > > > Fetuses don't think. They don't verbalize. > > > Have you ever heard of the fact that the fetus > > > will recoil from the needle, ... > > A fetus cannot verbalize, I hope we are in agreement > > on that. The jury is out on whether a fetus "thinks". "Recoil[ing] from" > > some pain source is instinctive, and *not* an indication of thought processes. > > Marcel. I am afraid you have missed the point entirely. The author of the > previous article is demonstrating that the intelligence required for a > simple reflex is no greater than the intelligence (s)he uses to think > and verbalize. There was no other point. > -- > The Watcher Watcher, My very point is that NO intelligence is necessary for reflex action. Flight from pain and injury is characteristic of all forms of life, down to plants and viruses, none of which are intelligent. I believed the author 's "proof" to be invalid because it rests ona faulty assumption Marcel.