playtime
3845
your language and constellation of concepts seems to provide an answer
if you can trace the descent of watches to previous generations, if you can discern a "family resemblance" (and I use this phrase in all its wittgensteinian splendor) between earlier models and later ones, then perhaps one can speak of DNA--yet DNA is ever recombining, and yielding different expressions. Of course, we never expect a grandson or granddaughter to bear a 1-to-1 resemblance to his or her grandfather--but we do expect SOME resemblance, and just as significantly some difference--and we celebrate that difference.
Biologists struggle with these same issues--the notion of species is ever in flux; philosophers have posited concepts like homology and perduration to help explain identity through time........and yet they still confront difficulties..... Such concepts place a strain on everyday language, and invite the Lewisian incredulous stare. Perhaps it is best to abandon the idea of "following" and "disregarded". Instead, perhaps we should say that DNA and their expression have their day in the sun--only to be overshadowed by yet a different set of new DNA (whose descent is nevertheless apparent) and their expression. If we say it this way, we avoid the difficulties involved in defining when something "follows" or "disregards" some core strand of DNA that by definition does not exist....
This message has been edited by playtime on 2011-01-24 20:03:54 This message has been edited by playtime on 2011-01-24 20:10:35
When did “Panerai’s DNA” cease being created and start being followed (or disregarded)?
Sorry mate, this is going to be a short and rather vulgar reply
thks mate
DNA-RNA-Protein
Hiya Craig..
your language and constellation of concepts seems to provide an answer
