home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
- Subject: Re: Popper and Abian and other matters
- Message-ID: <97734@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Date: 15 Nov 92 19:19:33 GMT
- References: <94684@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Nov10.004237.50028@Cookie.secapl.com> <96932@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Nov11.223252.133155@Cookie.secapl.com>
- Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
- Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
- Lines: 8
- Nntp-Posting-Host: sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- In-reply-to: frank@Cookie.secapl.com (Frank Adams)
-
- In article <1992Nov11.223252.133155@Cookie.secapl.com>, frank@Cookie (Frank Adams) writes:
- >You seemed to be saying that "fittest" has a naturalistic *definition* -- in
- >terms of things like cardiovascular efficiency, etc. I don't think it does.
-
- I gave naturalistic definitions in limited situations only. I have no idea
- as to whether I even think it has a naturalistic definition in general.
- --
- -Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
-