Re: for the academics amongst us

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Tue Sep 04 2001 - 15:58:58 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "RE: Words From Our Sponsor: A Jeweler Commissions a Novel" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA02801 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:04:23 +0100
Subject: Re: for the academics amongst us
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:58:58 -0400
x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas
From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <20010904145915.AAA4515@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    On 09/04/01 10:41, Philip Jonkers said this-

    >``In science one tries to tell people,
    > in such a way as to be understood by everyone,
    > something that no one ever knew before.
    > But in poetry, it's the exact opposite.''

    One way to look at it, I suppose, but, IMHO, both science and poetry are
    attempts to explain, to the maximum number of people, different things.

    But both have requirements to be understood.

    It's just that some people like facts, and others like feelings.

    And some people like both.

    Wordsworth and Wilson.

    Chet Raymo, science reporter/columnist for the Boston Globe, is an echoer
    of my sentiment that both expressions of knowledge are equally
    understandable, and equally important.

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 04 2001 - 16:09:14 BST