Hi Case, you said, On 2/19/07, Case <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They [scientists] tend to nit pick this to death. It is > the source of a great many scientific disputes in all areas of science. > Oversimplification of these kinds of arguments does indeed lead to much > misunderstanding and misrepresentation. >
Look, Case, there are good scientists and bad scientists (just like there are politicians) but the point you miss is the "death". Mistaking correlation for causation is a schoolboy error surely, we are beyond discussing that - no "scientist" worth the name will do that (except in error) ? You make a point I keep making, it is all to easy to pick holes logically in "proof" of causation, and a good scientist will indeed pick it to death - "careful with that razor, Occam". A better scientist will realise that death is the only outcome, and look for an interaction of bottom-up with top-down causation from outside the level he is nit-picking, and bring that into the argument. I'm tempted to quote "Cornflowers" again, but I've not used this one in a while ... Talking of "death" try this from Wordsworth's "Tables Turned" "One impulse from a vernal wood May teach you more of man, Of moral evil and of good, Than all the sages can. Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; Our meddling intellect Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things:-- We murder to dissect." Regards 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
