RE: Convergence + protein folding

From: Lawrence DeBivort (
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 22:24:57 BST

  • Next message: "RE: Convergence + protein folding"

    Received: by id WAA14846 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:20:42 +0100
    From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <>
    To: <>
    Subject: RE: Convergence + protein folding
    Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:24:57 -0400
    Message-ID: <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
    Importance: Normal
    In-Reply-To: <3B7407CB.10957.136E62B@localhost>
    Precedence: bulk

    > One argues logicallly based upon the facts; the alternative, to
    > argue illogically, always fails to produce a correct conclusion.
    > Stephen Jay Gould, who dismisses Sheldrake, is arguably a
    > greater evolutionary theorist than is Dawkins, and I'll just bet that
    > Daniel Dennett would dismiss him, too.

    I've been following this thread with interest, but may have missed a
    critical point: surely no one is saying that Dawkins accepts the notion of
    'morphic resonance'?

    - Lawrence

    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 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 23:00:10 BST