unknown relevance

Dear Soeren & discussants,

Metaphysical discussions are fine, but perhaps not too rigorously conduced
at the earliest phases of the puzzle-making effort. I would not discard for
metaphysical reasons any of the info views that I have heard of in our
little fis arena --including Tom�s "mechanicism" or Soeren�s own "second
order-autop.-pragmatism". Both may be OK to suggest me some considerations
relevant for my own constructive efforts --or for someone else�s efforts.

I see our discussions, particularly the coming sci. ones, as an interesting
way of quiet and friendly "pieces exchange". Does your idea fit into my
scheme? Does mine fit into yours? Of course, each one perfectly knows how
to make his own decissions...

bests

Pedro

PS. No doubt I will very interested in semioticians� criticisms about the
language of cells when the bio conference comes. However, at the time being
I cannot help but remembering the irated replies of anthropologists and
philosophers when "culture" was applied to chimpanzees' artifacts and
behavioral habits in early 70�s. After Tyler Bonner and E.O. Wilson seminal
elegant works (final 70�s early 80�s) the topic became a common place.
Obviously we cannot apply the term in exactly the same way both to humans
and chimps, but socially and scientifically the use of the term is now
fairly accepted.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Mariju�n --FAX 34 976 761 861 --TEL 34 976 761 927
Dto. Ingenieria Electronica y Comunicaciones
CPS, Universidad de Zaragoza
Zaragoza 50015, SPAIN
Received on Fri Dec 19 12:06:19 1997