Jay Hanson wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Stephen Straker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >Of course, any and all relations can LOOK hierarchical IF you are
> >prepared or intending to see them that way. The question is: are
> >they REALLY hierarchical, and THAT requires more than looking.
A consensus or preponderance of subjective opinions is the closest to
empirical certainty humans can attain without claiming a personal pipeline
to THE TRUTH. The act of stepping off (with no protective or technical
devices) a 500 ft cliff with rocks below as being unwise, is an example of
consensus. It is a preponderance understanding that adaptive fitness varies
somewhat between different individuals (& specimens) within species of life
forms (incl plants). Those differences can be referred to as "hierarchy",
even if no conscious awareness can be demonstrated or inferred.
"arrangement into a graded series" is one of the dictionary definitions in
my Webster's
JH:
>
> It seems the burden to disprove our everyday experiences -- and
> the findings of the scientific community -- is on you.
I agree with Jay, here. What some might prefer to be the case doesn't make
it so - for betting purposes, anyway! Competition is as real as
cooperation, and some are more adept than others in each. Or so it seems to
me.
Steve
