Re: Child Rrearing

Lee Daniel Crocker (
Tue, 30 Dec 1997 10:41:43 -0800 (PST)

> Dr. Alice Miller's hypothesis has descriptive power (how things are);
> explanatory power (why things get to be that way); and predictive power
> (how things will get to be that way); and this is all we can ever ask
> from any scientific hypothesis. It has meaning; and it has content,
> and -- best of all -- It's empirically testable and _falsifiable_.

Then I suppose I'll have to read it now. All I was trying
to say is that your earlier description of the book made me want
to run from it. This one makes me want to read it. Look at
those two descriptions and you'll see why, and perhaps if you
think some other book is worthy of my time, you'll stick to
descriptions like this one.

> And the damaged children and the damaged adults are all around us, for
> everyone to see who can bear to look at them. Why is it that I get
> this feeling that Lee Daniel Crocker _doesn't want to look_?

If it's a good work, I'll look. But when I see a label on some herb
that says "Increases energy, boosts the immune system, burns fat,
grows hair, smoothes wrinkles, and makes your children behave",
my reaction is to hold on to my wallet.

> Here's my standard offer:
> Buy the book.
> Read it. Or even have someone whose judgement you trust
> read it for you.
> Come back to us, and if you can honestly say the book and the time
> taken to read it were wasted for you, I'll refund the full price.

No need for the offer. I just wanted a description that didn't
sound like a snake-oil pitch, and this one was sufficient.

Lee Daniel Crocker <> <>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC