Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 01/29/05
- Next message: David C. Ullrich: "Re: result of adding two brownian paths in plane (almost surely)"
- Previous message: Raving Loonie: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:09:36 -0600
robert j. kolker wrote:
>
>
> Albert wrote:
>
>>
>> Wood and steel were your stupid examples. Come up with another if you
>> like.
>>
>
> If you looked at the remark in context (difficult for a person with only
> 13 neurons) you would have seen that was an analogy. Not to be taken
> literally.
An anology with what?
--
"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: David C. Ullrich: "Re: result of adding two brownian paths in plane (almost surely)"
- Previous message: Raving Loonie: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|