Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Wolf Kirchmeir (wwolfkir_at_sympatico.ca)
Date: 03/23/05
- Next message: Mark Martin: "Re: Brookhaven Responds to black hole report"
- Previous message: Joseph Lazio: "Re: Superluminal Quasar Jets : The Beaming "Explanation" Appears Inadequate"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:56:56 -0500
robert j. kolker wrote:
>
>
> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>
>>
>> It seems to me that any rigorous definition must begin with undefined
>> terms, and then conform to the common usage of the domain in which it
>> is to be used.
>
>
> By common usage you mean usage agreed upon by those who wish to work in
> said domains.
>
> Bob Kolker
Yes, that's what I said.
- Next message: Mark Martin: "Re: Brookhaven Responds to black hole report"
- Previous message: Joseph Lazio: "Re: Superluminal Quasar Jets : The Beaming "Explanation" Appears Inadequate"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
