Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site uwmacc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois From: dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: margaritas ante procos -- on the rocks, please Message-ID: <338@uwmacc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 25-Sep-84 10:22:05 EDT Article-I.D.: uwmacc.338 Posted: Tue Sep 25 10:22:05 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 28-Sep-84 06:31:21 EDT References: <186@uf-csg.UUCP> Organization: UW Primate Center Lines: 23 > [Mark Fishman] > The fundamental problem with trying to debunk it is that those > who advance this world view (it isn't, by proper definition, a > "theory") have, in so doing, already rejected the principles of > reasoned discourse on the basis of which any such argument would > have to be erected. To embrace a non-falsifiable theory of > "magicness" is really to reject theory, to reject the derivation > of theory from observation, to reject science (and thereby to > reject reason) in the first place. To invoke superstition is NOT > to explain, but to seek to *evade* explanation's dominion. Some very good points. However, I am moved to ask: What is your proper definition of "theory"? I would assume from your comments that it should include a falsifiability criterion. Very well. What is the falsifiability test for (any brand of) evolution? -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight." Psalm 119:35