Robert Byers writes:
The research on boundaries would be a lot.
Yet I introduce that the concept of kind can be liberal and like morphology a very good guide.
It needs to be that kinds are more inclusive and so wolves, bears, seals, marsupial wolves, bears, are easily to be seen as the same kind. It could have more creatures from the fossil record and otherwise.
Flexibility. As another poster said kinds are not defined so one can fit lots in.
The research on boundaries would be a lot.
Yet I introduce that the concept of kind can be liberal and like morphology a very good guide.
It needs to be that kinds are more inclusive and so wolves, bears, seals, marsupial wolves, bears, are easily to be seen as the same kind. It could have more creatures from the fossil record and otherwise.
Flexibility. As another poster said kinds are not defined so one can fit lots in.
How would you like it if your physician's definition of disease was 'well it's sorta like smallpox and it's sorta like cholera so I will treat you for both or neither, your call.' How would you like it if some unknown engineer said 'well it's sorta like Newton but it's sorta like harmonically vibrating so it will be OK.' How would you like it if some preacher said 'well it's not actually in the Bible but you have to believe in it because it sounds good to you and my personal desires.'
Well, perhaps it is time to tell the truth, to yourself as well as others.
Edited by anglagard, : title misspeling
The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
™ Version 4.2