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.