Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #263Re: Science vs Philosophy of
From: Barry Merriman
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:04
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:04
14 lines
912 bytes
912 bytes
In article <TORKEL.92Aug28060221@bast.sics.se> torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen) writes: > > My only objection to this remark is that it is completely vacuous. What > is the point of discussing "philosophy" in terms that presuppose or > draw on no knowledge whatever of anything having to do with philosophy? Spoken like a true philosopher :-) -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Aug28.080413.7096@math.ucla.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!ucla-ma!newsReferences:
<TORKEL.92Aug28060221@bast.sics.se>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!ucla-ma!news From: barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) Subject: Re: Science vs Philosophy of Message-ID: <1992Aug28.080413.7096@math.ucla.edu> Sender: news@math.ucla.edu Organization: UCLA, Mathematics Department References: <TORKEL.92Aug28060221@bast.sics.se> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 08:04:13 GMT Lines: 16