Read the whole long thread... Ineresting
approaches there.
Well I've written a long reply, but decided not to post it after all:think:
JVkohl, take it easy. We're all individuals and as far as I know we're not against you, and we appritiate
your cotribute to the forums.
You want to threaten to quit giving your opinions - feel free it's your own choice
(I'd rather you won't but I'll fight for your right to do so).
But by all means - let everybody else say
theirs'. Nobody's here to hurt you :o
Misunderstandings do happen - but they can be fixed by a simple, polite
explenation. You did such explaning yourself on this thread for example, by saying "Yes". No need to get
offended:angel:
WELL hmmmm wow whats goin on
IMHO The Man JVK is an individual who is plain and simply who and what he is, I
personally dont doubt his credability especially now that i have been brought to focus on the Gentleman in the last
few weeks,
He has his own unique and individual style as a human product of his science and all factors
considered he is contributing to the forum and imparting wisdom and reports as well as his own opinions and
studies,
and i am thankful that he is hanging around and just being who he is and thats all anyone can really
do.
Maby we
have had enough of disecting and scrutenising the poor guy.
I recon we all should reconsile our
differences and move on whilst life is short and sweet.
I for one will try and not be sutch a shit
stirrer, And seeing as i am one of the least amoungst yous all will save my venom for any spammers that creep on to
the forum BLAM BLAM to our real Enemies :rasp:
Hard Science and Soft Science
Quote:
Originally Posted by
terry0400-40
He has his own unique and individual style as a human product of his science and all
factors considered he is contributing to the forum and imparting wisdom and reports as well as his own opinions and
studies
Maby we have had enough of disecting and scrutenising the poor guy.
Well said! My
style is best suited for discussing facts, and usually this is with other "hard" scientists. Some have an ego that
limits discussion of their opinions; most do not. But no researcher I know has an ego that limits their discussion
of "hard" scientific facts, as I have recently been asked to do in conjunction with an award. (Award notice
below):
---
James V. Kohl has been selected to receive the Ira and Harriet Reiss Theory Award for 2007 from
the Foundation for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (FSSS). The award is given annually for the best social science
article, chapter, or book published in the previous year in which theoretical explanations of human sexual attitudes
and behaviors are developed. Kohl's review: "The Mind's Eyes: Human Pheromones, Neuroscience, and Male Sexual
Preferences" was published in the Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 18(4): 313-369, and concurrently
published as a book chapter in the "Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality." In conjunction with the award,
Kohl is an invited plenary session speaker at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of
Sexuality (SSSS) in November, 2007, which will be held in Indianapolis, Indiana.
---
Some of you know about
the award I received for my 2001 invited review that linked neuroscience and ethology. This latest award crosses
from neuroscientific ("hard") science into social ("soft") science, and helps to extend my sphere of influence to
the soft sciences. Nevertheless, I have never pretended to understand much about the soft sciences.
James V.
Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros
One of my longest replies ever
A few things JVK (most important is saved for last)...
(My emphasize...)
1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jvkohl
I discussed the censured posts with one of the moderators and with Bruce in January 2007,
and decided to post only to the "Pheromone Research" section.
It is better designed for
scientific purposes, like mine. No need to rehash this here. It's the Love-Scent Forum; not my
forum.
I have a popular domain where I can post whatever I like, but it's harder for me to update regularly.
So, my posts to the "Pheromone Research" section are a matter of convenience, and they have helped me to avoid
additional conflict here.
DrSmellThis made some defamatory comments on another Forum, and linked back to
the Love-Scent thread for support of his defamatory comments. He led me to look at posts that had gone from
"Pheromone Research" to more general discussion, which brought me here. I'm not planning on any more
debate, which is why I posted the comments DrSmellThis made and my response to them. I don't
have time to debate either the "soft" science approach, or discuss the "soft" science comments with anonymous
posters. I try to make time to discuss my "hard" science approach with anyone, anonymous or not, who wants to learn
more about it.
James V. Kohl
author: The Scent of Eros and The Mind's Eyes
creator: The Scent of Eros
pheromone-enhanced products
Well said.
And I thank you for putting it clearly and politely this time
around. I think I may finally understand what you ment when saying you quit that style of posing on this
forum. If I understand correctly, you mearly ment to respect the forum and it's owners\moderators in your own way.
That I can definitely encourage.
Just FYI: I did notice there was some information censured on
that specific thread, the moment I saw this post
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Irish
Mtnjim, Bubba mentioned professional background - see post# 48. Not that I think it matters -
post # 61.
and realized that replys #48 & #61 are not even present at the thread anymore :think:
Yet, I
realized it is the forum-moderator's\owner's right to decide to sometimes censure a thread, and did not (& still
don't) have any intention of arguing nor disreguarding their choise\right.
And I am happy you made the same
decision (as you seem to have made).
and about "I'm not planning on any more debate" - I understand
where you come from on this and am actually very glad to see you're taking the same mature stand as Bruce adviced.
I hope you've decided that by your own free will, and I see the intelligence in that decision.
Much better
attitude than before - and honestly much better put. I thank you for that :thumbsup:
2)
I respect your
style - as long as you respect other's styles too (Hope I have the right grammer hehe :o).
With these last few
posts - You seem to have made a great progress in terms of showing your respect for the styles of others (IMO -
including Bruce... which is nice:angel: ). I hope I'm not the only one who sees that; and amongst the ones I hope
who see that too - is also yourself :cheers:
3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jvkohl
Quote:
Originally Posted by
idesign
I agree
with you Terry, and I try to follow the same guidelines of good behavior. I have no differences with anyone here.
Certainly not with JVK, who is the only manufacturer who posts here, and creator of a product which
has much respect from me and many others.
Thanks.
However, DrSmellThis and Archtypical Hybrid (HEC)
are among other manufacturers who have posted here, which may help to explain some of our differences.
Personaly, I see this as (and hope it is) an acknowledgement of the " " " " "authority" " " " of those
two individual personas mentioned in this quote above [notice that the gross word "authority" is only used
here for me lacking a better word:box: :angel: I do not intent to mock anyone by using it]. JVK
clearly made a stand to prevent discrediting their obviously present scientific background on the field.
This again
is an improvement which I welcome with open arms. Bruce, I think there's a very positive breakthrough here and we
should welcome it as long as we have that oportunity :cheers: (hope you're reading, rather than me just talking to
the air hehe:lol: ).
...
4)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jvkohl
which may help to
explain some of our differences.
I think my emphasiz here makes my little additional point clear.
5)
For me personally, this is the most important part of my reply, which is why i saved it for
last.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jvkohl
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tenaciousBLADE
With all that said JVK, and with all due
respect... You are generalizing what you claim to be HIS opinion on you (or agenda... i.e. "wanting to hurt you")...
on everybody else on the forum. you come from a starting premise that we are ALL here to hurt you. Or you at least
seem to doubt each one of us before you trust.
With Bubba's support, DrSmellThis
sufficiently managed to force me out of this forum for a while, because my responses were limited by the moderators,
at Bruce's suggestion. With enough support from participants like you (there was some support at the time), I might
not have dropped out at all. At the point that most of my posts were censured by the moderators, Forum members were
only getting half the picture. I'm surprised that I've been able to tell the rest of the story in this thread. It
takes very little for a few vocal participants to gain control of what is allowed to be seen on any Forum. My
comments are not meant to implicate the majority of Forum members, who come here for information and to compare
notes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tenaciousBLADE
Instead of coming up with such a mean rude attitude, you could
simply come with the starting assumption that most of us DIDN'T come here to hurt you. Doing otherwise, would be
(and is) disrespectful to us as mear human beings.
I apologize for being either mean, or
rude; that was not my intent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tenaciousBLADE
Just take it easy man.
I will.
Thanks.
James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros
Sincerely JVK - I'm satisfied. That is all I
asked for. I thank you for taking the time & effort to come down to my point; and for simply mentioning that you had
no intent of being rude. I have the best of hope and I believe that you will probably pay better attention from now
on, to the fact that the readers on this forums are each his\her own individuals, and that you'll show more
specified attention when reguarding specific people (I'm not saying your attention was never specifed though :) -
don't get me wrong :D).
6)
I think we can be assured that the freedom given in these forums has been of great
service on this specific thread. And I personally would like to thank the moderators who have probably dealt with
some though questions during this long thread.
I wouldn't like to be in that position lol - yet I think you made a
great job here :thumbsup: (from my humble perspective, that is).
P.S.
I would actually like to see Bubba
being active in the forums; But in no way am I condoning or welcoming further confrontation with such face to face
street fights (If I may call them so... maybe I may not :think: :o).
I think misunderstandings can be solved with
mutual effort. So if there ever would be another such misunderstanding - all it takes is for both sides to wanna get
along with each other and hear each other out rather than try to prove their own side up until the final-round
:rasp: :POKE:
With that said, I do think that Bubba was intersting and it even might be possible for him to get
along qith all of us (including JVK).
But then again - that's only my inoccent opinion :o:angel:
Moderators -
feel free to delete my P.S. message if you see fit. I won't take it personaly :lovestruc
My water-grinding hypothesis
lol.
What a nice referal idesign :LOL:
Well, I see your point JVK. But he wasn't trying to
debate.. although he WAS debating. I think he was just trying to make you see his point whether or not it's
valid.
By simply acknowledging he has a point and you understand what it is, you might have been able to
evade the so called waste of your time and the clearly stormy means used in that debate.
What I am saying is
that attitude may sometimes change the result of our actions even if the action remains the same. And that was
somewhat integrated in Bubba's main point... which is why I still have some respect for what he was trying to
do.
I agree that he gave you no means of explaning yourself and took you around the boosh (in a brilliant manner if
I might add - you gotta respect his smarts even when used like that); but he didn't seem to be aware of the need
for a debate to be mutual in terms of comparison. I don't think he was reaching for a debate... I think he was
simply reaching for you to show you respect the forum users and for you to pay more attension than what he thought
you were paying, to being subjective.
But then again, this is only an hypothesis... and there's no actual
reason to keep grinding this issue is there? :o:think: :o
Yeah I'm probably just grinding water here...
Which
means we both are wasting time with this haha :trout:
Well... Bottom line, I see where you're coming from, and
I think in a way things are better now :angel:
Scientific philosophies at war
Quote:
Originally Posted by
belgareth
This is a very old subject and has nothing whatsoever to do with
pheromones.
Different philosophical approaches to science are very old, but also have a huge impact
on what we learn about pheromones; who we learn it from; and the significance of what we learn. For example, and in
your own words on 2/16/07:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
belgareth
Bubba,
Excellent!! I applaud your integrity as a
scientist. That was what I was taught and have tried to apply to everything.
Since you were taught to
believe, like Bubba, in a "soft" science philosophical approach consistent with his quote from Fenyman, you're
going to be somewhat biased by a different philosophical approach than mine, which is based on a "hard" science
philosophical approach (e.g., Meehl and Marler) that may seem critical of Bubba (and perhaps of you). It is not
critical, it's just different!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
belgareth
JVK is going to continue to believe as he
chooses to believe and others will do the same.
My point, exactly. Philosophical approaches to
science are as unlikely to change as any other belief system. But learning more helps with change. What I'm trying
to learn more about, and help to teach others, is that philosophical approaches should not be the main criteria used
either to interpret what is being said, or to judge the merits of research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
belgareth
I
personally got very tired of acting as a referree in a long series of pointless personal attacks between two primary
antagonists.
By applauding Bubba's scientific integrity, I think you did more than than referee the
discussion. What do you think?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
belgareth
Whatever, they can have their little war, but it is
not pheromone related and is being moved to open discussion.
The philosophy of science (among warring
factions) is very much pheromone-related. It is important to study design, significance of findings, and trust in
the interpretation of results--among other aspects of pheromone research (i.e., the section of this Forum that might
be best suited for my posts).
James V. Kohl
The Scent of Eros