Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ernie.berkeley.edu!tedrick
From: tedrick@ernie.berkeley.edu (Tom Tedrick)
Newsgroups: net.sci,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Helpful vs. Harmful Therapy
Message-ID: <12481@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Tue, 18-Mar-86 14:40:37 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12481
Posted: Tue Mar 18 14:40:37 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Mar-86 03:03:08 EST
References: <899@decwrl.DEC.COM> <402@aoa.UUCP> <192@ulowell.UUCP> <954@lanl.ARPA> <208@ulowell.UUCP> <707@hounx.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: tedrick@ernie.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Tom Tedrick)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 16
Xref: watmath net.sci:613 net.philosophy:4520

>Axelrod is on to
>some good theories.  So is Hofstatder and Smullyan.

Ummm, what works of Smullyan are you refering to? I have
about 5 of his books (one on formal logic, two on retrograde
chess analysis, two on popularized logic {like What Is The Name
Of This Book}). He also gave a talk in Berkeley a few years ago
that I had the pleasure of hearing.

Has he done some other work that I am not aware of?

Also, I never took Hofstatder seriously after reading GEB.
Was that a mistake?

   -Tom
    tedrick@ernie.berkeley.edu