On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:16 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > [Mark] > > In terms of the tautology, you seem not to recognize the circular > > referencing. The fittest survive. Why do they survive? Because they > are > > the fittest. How do we know that they are the fittest? Because they > > survive. Survival defines the fittest because the fittest survive. > > Nope, you're making the same mistake as Alexander. > Try this analogy: Suppose I race the world-record holder at 100 m. > Is it tautological (i.e., necessary) that s/he will win? No. Of course, > when s/he does win, you will explain it by their superior skill, training, > muscles, > etc. Still, however improbable, I could win. > Survival does not define (i.e., make necessary) the fittest. Sometimes > the survivors are just lucky. > Craig >
Hi Craig, In your example we would term that the survival of the luckiest. I much prefer that over survival of the fittest. Indeed, isn't it just luck which makes one the survivor, wether it be by self described fitness or whatever else enters in. Thanks, Mark > 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 > 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
