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