Re: Essentialism and such (was a bunch of previous subject lines)

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl" <Carl@dondwiggins.com>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 6:18 PM

> Again, their conception of morphogenetic fields is quite distinct from
> Sheldrake, and the term has been around quite a while.
>
> Even a cursory glance at the book would clear up most of the above,

Then please explain this, on- or offlist. You're right I haven't read the 
book; two university studies don't leave me enough time. I have barely 
started reading the 3rd supplement of Glut's encyclopedia, and still not 
finished Mesozoic Vertebrate Life or the Jehol Biota book with the large 
<drool> photos I bought at the congress in summer -- and then I'm supposed 
to read a philosophical book in the typical boring style* first?

* Judging from the quotes you kindly provided. But I don't see a reason to 
expect the rest to be different.