"Lennart Kiil"  wrote:
> > Reductionism is not dead - in fact it is one of the main foundation
> > stones of the scientific method.

> LK:-
> This is certainly true, reductionism is a viable scientific 
> method. I think 
> and hope that what Mayr meant was that we cannot understand 
> nature and gain 
> complete knowledge of its workings by just examinig it from the smallest 
> level we can detect. In other words it is one-leveled exclusive 
> epistemological reductionism that is dead (if such a caricature 
> ever existed 
> in the first place).

JE:-
Could you please expand on what you
mean within evolutionary theory by:
".. one-leveled exclusive 
epistemological reductionism that is dead"

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/7/04 6:06:06 AM