[From Bruce Abbott (970220.1200 EST)]
Mary Powers 970219 --
Bruce A. takes Gary to task for saying evolution is purposeful -
I agree - it is organisms that are purposeful (and always were).
But Bruce then says "the _products_ of evolution become
purposeful". Evolution produces products? Both of you are
reifying - treating an abstract concept as a material thing.
You are suggesting that this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
I disagree. My argument with Gary did not center on the problem of
reification, but on the confusion that results from his use the term
"purposeful" as he did in reference to evolution.
Furthermore, I do not agree that my phrase "the products of evolution"
reifys evolution.
Would it have been acceptable to you if I had said "the products of the
evolutionary _process_?" Isn't is perfectly O.K. to say that the products
of the hydrolysis of water are hydrogen and oxygen? If so, then why is it
reification to say that the products of evolution are sponges and unicorns?
Your rephrasing sounds more like reification. Is it reification to say that
hydrolysis of water [a process] produces hydrogen and oxygen? Or that
evolution [a process] produces sponges and unicorns? Since you object to
both ways of phrasing these statements, how would _you_ say these things to
avoid the problem you see in them?
Progress wants to know! (;->
Reifyingly,
Bruce