tuppence wrote:Jovaro, you injected extra information into that phrase 'survival of the fittest.' In doing that, you changed what it was. It makes no mention, in and of itself, of anything that would contribute to survival or fitness. The phrase itself, without anything added to it, is circular and meaningless.
Those that survive are referred to as fit. Those that are fit survive. It is circular. If you add what fitness refers to, then you have added something. I'm not sure I agree with that definition, even though that is the official one (having the most offspring), but nevertheless, once you add something to the phrase you have added meaning -- hopefully.
What I was arguing was a logical point.
If you want to get into what fitness really means, that is a different point.
Remember my illustration of 'a girl is a female' and 'a female is a girl'? That's circular -- there is no meaning because both words mean the same thing. BUT if I add something to the meaning of female -- for instance the genetic difference between male and female -- then I have added meaning to the whole thing.
That does not mean the original phrase was false. "A girl is a female" is true. "Survival of the fittest" may be true. BUT IT CARRIES NO MEANING WITHIN ITSELF without a definition added, in the one case to 'female,' and in the other case to 'fittest.'
Logic lesson for today.
Then add a defenition!!! That is what Darwin did himself as well!!
AAAARGHHH......
God is the Lord. The Lord is God.
A circular meaningless phrase!
And you dared to accuse me of debating for the sake of debating? Without looking for truth?
tssss....