Hi, John.
I think T. V. Rajan makes good sense when he states that "it is hubris to
think that no phenomenon is valid unless we understand its mechanism of
action." But when the phenomenon itself, as well as the mechanism, is what
is proposed and not observed, it's rather a moot point. Kind of "The myth
of phenomenon" as well as "The myth of mechanism." Two myths make a good
solid myth, is what I would think.
Regards,
Todd S. Greene
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/
###### John W. Burgeson 6/25/01 10:43 AM ######
An interesting story from the NYT on this subject:
http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2001/jun/comm_010625.html
John Burgeson (Burgy)
www.burgy.50megs.com
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 25 2001 - 23:05:29 EDT