Print

Print


Well Herb, all I can say is thanks for giving the thread a running start!

M

>
> Regarding the merit of the post.  I believe that had you posted a critical
> view and offered this as a further manifestation of the trend to new
> disciplines which  *de facto *(note no conspiracy, no agent)* *serve to
> rationalize capitalism, a vibrant discussion may have resulted.  This brings
> to mind a generalization that may be true: a reasonable indicator of the
> value of posting an article is how extensive a thread results.  Maybe my
> blah blah here will provoke commentary and thereby validate the post.
> Maybe, maybe not.  Only the email god knows how many on this list-serve have
> already filtered out our blah-blahs.
>
> herb
>
> PS  Now that you've cleared off your desk, would you come by my house and
> clear off mine.  It's a mess.
> h
>
> Michael Balter wrote:
>
> Shortly after George's most recent post, while cleaning off my work desk,
> I came across the attached book review in Science which I had saved.
> Although the book reviewed deals mostly with alleged expertise in the social
> sciences, I think it applies to the sciences as well, which is why I had
> saved it. It is also yet another illustration of Balter's Rule, which is
> usually formulated as follows: The moment that an expert on any subject says
> that something cannot or will not happen, it becomes, at that very instant,
> absolutely inevitable that it actually will happen.
>
> cheers, Michael
>
> --
> www.michaelbalter.com
>
> ******************************************
> Michael Balter
> Contributing Correspondent, Science
> [log in to unmask]
> ******************************************
>
>


-- 
www.michaelbalter.com

******************************************
Michael Balter
Contributing Correspondent, Science
[log in to unmask]
******************************************