[MD] Limits of Science

[MarshaV]

Ian,

An exclamation mark may be used to intensify a statement.  I just checked a 
dictionary.  I didn't even use your name as salutation.  It was a general statement.  

I'm quite tired of hearing that you think I 'get it' without some supporting 
comments.  What exactly do you think I get?  How and why?   


Marsha






On Sep 12, 2010, at 6:22 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:

> Marsha,
> 
> Emphasizing that a named person could do with some enlightenment IS a
> personal attack.
> 
> But since I genuinely believe you do get it, I'm pretty sure it was accidental.
> As I said take care (smiley) :-)
> Ian
> 
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 11:20 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Ian,
>> 
>> The exclamation mark was meant to emphasize what I think is important.
>> Calling you an idiot would be a personal attack.  I don't think you are an
>> idiot, and didn't call you any such name.
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 12, 2010, at 6:16 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>> 
>>> Marsha there you go again with the (accidental - I hope) personal attacks.
>>> 
>>> Aimed explicitly at me "And a little enlightenment would help
>>> (exclamation mark) !".
>>> 
>>> Take care ;-)
>>> Ian
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 11:09 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 12, 2010, at 5:56 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> But therein lies the rub Marsha.
>>>>> 
>>>>> GOF / Classical / Official / Methodical science may believe it is
>>>>> incapabale of making value judgements .... but the reality of science
>>>>> - scientists being people - involves as many value judgements as any
>>>>> other walk of life.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is Maxwell's "Scientific Neurosis".
>>>>> 
>>>>> The two sides need integration (a la Parker-Follett) not division and
>>>>> reinforcement (eg by better definitions).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ian
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> And some enlightenment would do the trick!   But I believe a new
>>>> level with an enlightened point-of-view is necessary.  imho.  - Marsha
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 10:43 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2010, at 5:28 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-method10.htm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Enjoy
>>>>>>> Ian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Science is also incapable of making value judgments."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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/md/archives.html
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 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/md/archives.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ___
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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/md/archives.html
>>>> 
>>> 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/md/archives.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 
>> 
>> 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/md/archives.html
>> 
> 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/md/archives.html


 
___