Ah well, it's Ian who decides when an issue is too contentious to consider a wikipedia quote.
So all I have to say is: that's interesting. On Aug 25, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote: > Marsha asked of Krim ... > >> The MoQ is based on Darwin and the Tao? Anyone besides you think >> that this is so? > > [IG] Yes, clearly. > >> First, evolution has changed considerably since the days >> of Darwin's publications, and the evolution of species is quite different >> than >> the evolution of static patterns. > > [IG] Clearly again, the model of evolution has itself evolved as both > Darwin and Pirsig would predict and continues to do so. I see no > difference in the evolutionary processes .... I regularly use the word > "species" to denote any static pattern. Species are "special" in the > sense of being distinct, long-lived over multiple generations, and > therefore self-sustaining, repairing / reproducing over many > generations .... in all levels above the organic (not just > biological). > > Clearly Darwin didn't have the benefit of a Taoist monism at the > heart of his thinking .... GOF phyisicalist scientific objectivism > only .... but see above. Neither Darwin nor Pirsig, nor any of us > (their interpreters) have it 100% right, that would be terminal. I > tend to be less critical of that fact, but I wouldn't argue for > perfection. > > Ian ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
