I removed him by mistake. I have just put him back on.

JC Garelli, Chomsky listowner

In a message dated  6 Jan 97 at 12:58, B. Oliver Sheppard says:

 > I'd like to request an explanation as to why Brian J. Callahan was
 > kicked off the CHOMSKY list. Below is a reproduction of his
 > 2nd-to-last post, posted before he was kicked off by the
 > list-owner. (His last post was to alert someone that their text was
 > showing up as being garbled). In the post below, Callahan expresses
 > disagreement with the list-owner's views, though not the
 > list-owner's person, thus keeping well in-line with the rules.
 >         Again, since list-kicks aren't made public, it was only
 >         through Brian
 > Callahan's posts on other topically-related lists that I found he
 > was kicked off this one. I don't think it's too much to ask why he
 > was removed. He didn't seem to be breaking any list rules, though I
 > may not have researched all of his posts thoroughly. I'm hoping
 > that he wasn't kicked because the list-owner found him to be, on a
 > personal level, an "unlikable" person. This would be out of sync
 > with a list supposing to promote discussion, and now action, of
 > Chomsky's non-totalitarianist views.
 >         Thanks.
 >         Liberty and peace.
 >
 >                                                         B. Oliver
 >                                                         Sheppard
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > > Juan writes:
 > > >If this is the biased, foul way the work of Attachment Theorists is
 > > >going to be construed, I will refrain from posting anything else on
 > > >the issue in future.
 > >
 > > Don't be so sensitive.  This is what happens in a public forum, which you may
 > > now regret having started.
 > >
 > > >What I did say is that there are ways to early detection of
 > > >psychopathic and sociopathic tendencies in infants and preschoolers
 > > >and that psychiatric intervention in those cases might prevent
 > > >anti-social developments.
 > >
 > > Right, and Matthew raised the legitimate question of whether it would be a
 > > good idea to have a small number of experts in psychology monitoring and
 > > intervening in child-rearing based on their (the experts') definitions of
 > > "anti-social" and "pathological."  Surely this not an outrageous question,
 > > but rather one you would inevitably have to answer in order to convince
 > > people to go along with your ideas.
 > >
 > > >It couldn't be further from the truth to assert I ever mentioned
 > > >introducing new methods of childrearing. I only talked about
 > > >enhancing maternal care in a frivolous world where children are
 > > >reared by maids and au pair girls.
 > >
 > > I don't know the figures, but I would bet only a small proportion of the
 > > population is raised by maids and au pair girls because only a small
 > > percentage of families can afford them.  More and more, of course, children
 > > of all socio-economic groups are spending a great deal of time in day-care.
 > > What do you think the effect of that is on children?
 > >
 > > By the way, I lack a "scientific" grounding in this area, but I would guess
 > > that in a more caring, less competetive society, more time and resources
 > > would be devoted to the rearing of children and this would probably have a
 > > positive impact on their behavior as adults.

Juan Carlos Garelli, M.D., Ph.D.
Department of Early Development
Attachment Research Center
University of Buenos Aires