Re: Harris

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Al Fargnoli: "Re: ZERO (was: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory""
• Previous message: Bruce D. Scott: "Re: Gender differences"
• Maybe in reply to: Bruce D. Scott: "Harris"
• Next in thread: John W. Arnn: "Re: Harris"

Was extremely glad that my message was received so well. There
has been alot of very unprofessional fist-a-cuffs in the last thirty
years or so and it's high time we limit it to drunken late night drinking
sessions at professional meetings. I'll check on the Sahlins for you,
but it sounds as if his student already got you. I'd be happy
to pass along an article from a professional journal that sums up the
schism I briefly described. It's well written and entertaining and reads
like a short story. I'm curious to know if the same divisions exist in
your field. I would think that there are some real points of contention;
chaos, quantum, etc..
Thanks again for your level headed critique. It was a pleasant
surprise to find there are clear thinkers willing and able to
review more than one side of an issue.

Regards, "Ignerts is everware"

John W. Arnn

• Next message: Al Fargnoli: "Re: ZERO (was: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory""
• Previous message: Bruce D. Scott: "Re: Gender differences"
• Maybe in reply to: Bruce D. Scott: "Harris"
• Next in thread: John W. Arnn: "Re: Harris"