to the organizers of the International Environmental Association conference:

Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 17:32:20 -0500 (CDT)
From: "John C. Champagne" 
To: Demetri Kantarelis, Kevin Hickey dkantar@eve.assumption.edu
Cc: khickey@eve.assumption.edu, kantard@mindspring.com
Subject: Clarification: 'Leftist' tendencies, Human nature

Demetri Kantarelis
Kevin Hickey

The reviewer of my 'Gaia Brain' paper stated that the paper's 'leftist'
tendencies weaken it, but did not indicate what those 'leftest' tendencies
were.  I am not sure what is meant by this term.  I was not aware that
left-right political labels had any bearing on publication criteria.
Would it be possible for me to get clarification on this term.  A direct
quote from the text that, in the view of the referee, is demonstrably
false, or that implies that we would be required to perform actions
contrary to human nature, would help me understand the objections that
were the basis of the paper's disqualification.  

The paper was rejected for publication because it was said to be contrary
to human nature, and 'unrealistic'.  But the review does not make clear
what actions would be required under such a plan that would be contrary to
our nature.  Would it be possible for me to get some elaboration on the
assertion that this paradigm would require changes in human nature?  I
agree that if this plan required behaviors which are contrary to human
nature, it would be unrealistic.  But I wonder if this is the case.  What
behaviors does this plan require that the reviewer feels would fall into
this catagory?  What would it require of us that runs contrary to our
instincts and character? This proposal would require changes in human 
culture, not in human nature, in my view.

I am not able to change my paper to address the reviewer's objections
because I still do not understand what is the substance behind those
objections.  Can you help?  Is the reviewer aware of my questions?  I am
not as familiar with the protocols for seeking clarification and
elaboration in such a situation as some other conference participants may
be.  I hope I am not out of line in seeking clarification.  Perhaps I am.
Or perhaps my earlier communications to you regarding these questions did
not reach you.  My apologies if my questions seem to go beyond what any  
professional conference organizer should reasonably be expected to contend
with.  Chalk it up to my own ignorance--of protocols, and of the substance
behind the reviewer's objections.

Thank you.

Sincerely,


John Champagne  

Gaia Brain Theory  
Critique and Response http://www.oocities.org/athens/1942/critique.html
Cronkite for President

Gaia Brain summary: democratic ownership and free market management of natural resources

Cronkite for President - Can we find someone, (someone over 35 years old), who we could most all agree on for our next President?

© 1998, 2008

to the center of the Gaia Brain / Cronkite Draft page