Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 02/15/05
- Next message: Allan C Cybulskie: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:52:16 -0600
Tony Orlow (aeo6) wrote:
<snip>
> Neil - please don't snip out the relevant parts of my posts and then
> respond as if they weren't there, or I'll stop responding to you.
This seems to be a bad habit of Neil's. I am about ready to take
the same defensive action.
--
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the
range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally
impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."
-- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"
- Next message: Allan C Cybulskie: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: aeo6: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|