Re: virus: Technology (was manifest science)
Joe E. Dees (email@example.com)
Mon, 31 May 1999 17:10:16 -0500
Date sent: Mon, 31 May 1999 13:30:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dylan Durst <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: virus: Technology (was manifest science)
Send reply to: email@example.com
> > Websters uses the definition "a manner of accomplishing a task..."
> > (especially regarding the way knowledge may be applied).
> > My understanding allows that a technology is a NATURAL process.
> I agree. But I am wondering if this is the best word to use to describe
> the process.
> > Eyes, immune systems, etc. (while seeming to be types of "tools") are
> > more the PRODUCT of a technology than a technology proper. Thus,
> > *specialization* might be the technology which produces such biological
> > products.
> I would say that all the 'tools' we get from 'technology' are
> specializations. I think that our 'tools' that we have made fall under the
> same proccess that made our biological 'tools' (and i guess, our bodies).
> The proccess seems similar enough.
The difference is intentionality, Dylan; people possess it; evolution
> - dylan