Re: Folk Psychology and Social Convention

"Anthony Bucci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Likewise, genes and organism behavior both arose out of a
> primordial soup, we think.  It's telling that we know next
> to nothing about origins of language nor origins of life.
> Our modern science does not study those questions, really.

That is an awesome bunch of misinformation; do you bother to
look before deciding you have all the answers?

To the contrary, the Chemical Origins of Life have been
studied for over 50 years, have been the subject of multiple
series of scientific conferences, and the field is a hot
topic of ongoing research and classroom instruction.

For a few examples out of hundreds available:


http://physicalsciences.ucsd.edu/news_articles/origins_of_life_ucsd_ut051603.htm
http://www.floridatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1996b/080796e.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/275738.stm
http://www.unibas.ch/mdpi/ecsoc-3/c0009/c0009.htm

http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~sci_info/Highlights97/backissues/Oct97Frame.html
http://www.plym.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=3035
http://web99.arc.nasa.gov/%7Eastrochm/originlinks.html
http://www.staffs.ac.uk/schools/sciences/biology/sc0003/lect3.htm
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/lifeseminar.shtml
http://www.aiecon.org/conference/ECAL99.htm

Similarly, and I'll let you do your own winnowing here, the
origins of language are both well studied and under active
study:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22origins.%2Bof.%2Blanguage%22

Which doesn't mean the issues have been decided, but they
certainly are not being neglected as you suggest.

xanthian.


-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG