Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: Brain damage Message-ID: <700@mmintl.UUCP> Date: Tue, 1-Oct-85 06:08:34 EDT Article-I.D.: mmintl.700 Posted: Tue Oct 1 06:08:34 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 06:58:41 EDT References: <797@dataio.UUCP> <726@terak.UUCP> <688@mmintl.UUCP> <1345@teddy.UUCP> Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT Lines: 44 Summary: In article <1345@teddy.UUCP> rdp@teddy.UUCP (Richard D. Pierce) writes: >While this reply was inspired by this particular posting, it is not a >flame at the poster, but rather to the network in general. If you didn't intend to flame at the poster, you should have avoided doing so. >Over a number of years, members of my family have been involved in the >care and education of retarded and brain-damaged people. Recently, I >myself married and gained a 14-year old son with epilepsy. The cavalier >use of the term "brain-damaged" is both innappropriate and, in some cases, >downright offensive. The use of the term seems to be limited to net.lang.c, >which may or may not be testimony to the level of courtesy of the people >inclined to communicate in this forum. I only used the term because it was used in the article I was replying to. It is not one I would normally use. On the other hand, I don't think the word is particularly inappropriate in this context. We are talking about systems which are supposed to perform computational functions, as the brain does; it is a reasonable extrapolation of this idea to describe them as "brain-damaged" when they are deficient. One describes a city as "crippled" when normal activities are interrupted by an act of nature; I don't think this usage is any more insulting than that one. >The attitude exemplified above seems to give this person the impression that >matters of incontrovertable physical law are being questioned >("architectures ... ARE brain-damaged:, as opposed to "architectures ... >I find deficient"). I wished to make a stronger statement than that. Yes, it is my opinion; but I hold that opinion quite strongly. >The opinoins expressed on this net are just that. Frankly, >letters like the above I find to be the output of human architectures >which are socially-damaged. Frankly, I find sentences like the one above extremely offensive. >Flames in reply are not solicited, welcome, or accepted. You feel free to flame, but don't want to be flamed at? Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108