The difference lies in the systematic way of explaining negative
cases. If one is not explaining systematically, it is part of
degenerative research program, if I were to use that word coined by a
philosopher of science, Late Imre Lakatos. Even though two competing
research programs explain negative cases, one that does systematically
wins: these debates are part and parcel of the history and philosophy
of natural sciences. I was simply pointing out that "It all depends"
is a trivial answer. Oh reputed author, who is asinine? Who was harsh
against Roby when he did some work during his breaks, instead of
seeking clarifications which is part of any evaluation?
On 8/17/07, Robert Freeman <robertgfreeman_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Aug 17 2007 - 21:50:41 CDT
