Re: A typical scientist? (Re: Evidence . . . .
Dan Drake (email@example.com)
15 May 1995 22:08:50 GMT
In message <ABDB641A9668475A@cara.demon.co.uk> - firstname.lastname@example.org (Peter
>In article <Admin.0ym6@oubliette.COM>,
>Panopticon@oubliette.COM (Eric Shook) wrote:
><<Hectares of stuff deleted>>
>Great verbiage! How do you guys do it? It must take training.
Of course it does. You don't get a PhD in the social sciences by writing a
short dissertation. It was great fun for me to hear my sociologist friend
(dissertation of about 700 pages) comparing notes with my
astronomer friend (dissertation of almost 30 pages, and she said she had to
justify being so wordy).
Some people will think there's a relation between having something
substantial to say and being able to say it without massive verbiage to cover
up lack of content; but that's just us tools of John McCarthy. (Say, who is
this John McCarthy, anyway? Does he LISP in his postings?)
Dan Drake I'm not the NRA.
email@example.com --George Bush