Re: Logic

From: Philip Jonkers (
Date: Thu Jul 26 2001 - 11:40:42 BST

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Logic"

    Received: by id LAA12755 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:43:13 +0100
    From: Philip Jonkers <>
    X-Authentication-Warning: www-data set sender to using -f
    Subject: Re: Logic
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:40:42 +0200 (CEST)
    References: <[]>
    In-Reply-To: <[]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.5
    Precedence: bulk

    Wade said:
    > Evolution is not logical from a design viewpoint.
    > It does not separate the wheat from the chaff.

    Sorry, but no for you too Wade. Evolution might not be
    perfectly logical with respect to a perfect intelligent
    design, but it is logical the some degree nonetheless.
    Also it does `separate wheat from the chaff' if I correctly
    understand your niche. Natural selection means specific
    adaptation. A species adapts or perishes. During the competition
    between species only the fittest survive. Therefore, natural
    selection does function as a sieve to separate wheat from chaff.
    We humans wouldn't be around, being intelligent, on top of
    the food chain and all that, if it weren't for natural selection!
    Of all the macro-species, humans came out as winners in the
    rat-race called biological evolution.



    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 26 2001 - 11:47:19 BST