Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Wolf Kirchmeir (wwolfkir_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 02/09/05
- Next message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 19:30:42 -0500
Lester Zick wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 11:30:56 -0500, Wolf Kirchmeir
> <wwolfkir@sympatico.ca> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>
>
>>Lester Zick wrote:
>>[...]
>>
>>>Tehcnical vocabularies are only appropriate to the extent they subsume
>>>all problems. Otherwise not.
>>>
>>>Regards - Lester
>>
>>I guess there's no point trying to fix the whiffle tree and repair the
>>hames, then.
>
>
> Unless you happen to find yourself in Scotland.
>
> Regards - Lester
Nope.
- Next message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
