Re: Minimization principal for evolution
- From: "Peter F" <fell_spamtrap_in@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 01:03:10 -0500 (EST)
"g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dsqcu6$85k$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<snip>
As with any discussion of any issue in physics, philosophy, or anyother
study, the wise and well-seasoned student tends to be one who realizesthere
are no simple, easy, totally adequate definitions. Definitions arebut
tools of the reason for getting some idea what one is talking aboutand then
saying something that requires a very highly skilled player to see thefor
limitations of.
Stances and arguments are never won or lost on their ultimate merits,
the simple reason that there is an exception to every claim -- eventhis
one.
I am very much with you!
Without taking as much care as I do to qualify my
explanatory phylosophical terminology by help of
an extrapolated Principle of Tolerance applied attitude [or subscribing
to
"an accEPTable" standard of science-supported surmising ;)], and without
resorting to science-aligned philosophical pragmatism and
S_EPT_IC humored rEPTilian strategy (including self-satisfied slithering
excuses)
for being smugly ironic, I would not dare claiming that I have cemented
an immense insight about human evolution in just a handful of
partly corny looking concEPTs. ;-)
P
.
- References:
- Minimization principal for evolution
- From: Don
- Re: Minimization principal for evolution
- From: g
- Minimization principal for evolution
- Prev by Date: Article: Darwin's warm pond theory tested
- Next by Date: Study suggests precursor to phosphate in OOL
- Previous by thread: Re: Minimization principal for evolution
- Next by thread: Re: Minimization principal for evolution
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|