<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Misunderstanding Evolution</title>
	<atom:link href="http://indessed.com/roscivs/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://indessed.com/roscivs/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/</link>
	<description>a little poison now and then, that makes for pleasant dreams</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: roscivs</title>
		<link>http://indessed.com/roscivs/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>roscivs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:35:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://indessed.com/blog/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/#comment-22</guid>
		<description>Oh, I (as a full-blooded card-carrying descriptivist) have no problem with people changing the meaning of words at will; semantic shifts are inevitable. My frustration isn't that the meaning of "evolution" is changing, but rather that the *reason* why it's changing is (at least in part) due to a fundamental lack of understanding of biological evolution.

Not familiar enough with progressivism, utopianism, or Mr. Bloch to make an educated statement on that front, however. Any recommended reading?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I (as a full-blooded card-carrying descriptivist) have no problem with people changing the meaning of words at will; semantic shifts are inevitable. My frustration isn&#8217;t that the meaning of &#8220;evolution&#8221; is changing, but rather that the *reason* why it&#8217;s changing is (at least in part) due to a fundamental lack of understanding of biological evolution.</p>
<p>Not familiar enough with progressivism, utopianism, or Mr. Bloch to make an educated statement on that front, however. Any recommended reading?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Lewis</title>
		<link>http://indessed.com/roscivs/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://indessed.com/blog/2007/03/18/misunderstanding-evolution/#comment-21</guid>
		<description>I agree with you fully on the misuse of "evolution," in that a lot of people seem to have it cross-wired with "progression." Not to hijack the conversation too much, but what about progressivism? We don't see much of it these days (thank you, the Right Reverend "The End of History"), but surely human *societies* have the capacity to get better, and ought to. And yes, I recognize the difference between "capacity" and "ought," so treat them as two separate questions, Mr. Has-a-real-job. I ask because I've been reading a lot of Ernst Bloch lately and rather like utopianism as a defensible moral and ethical position.

While I'm injecting my scattered thoughts all around, I might also mention the following. While I, like you and (Bill Quinn, from whom I stole the quote), "hate people who don't have control over their own semantic fields," you have to at least acknowledge that one person (or three, or twenty people) probably aren't going to stop the memetic*/semantic shift of "evolution" to "progression." It's frustrating, but it's the way language works.

We're likely to get a linguist in the department quite soon, although unfortunately too late I think for my classwork.

* I mean this spelling: "meme-like evolution" as opposed to "mimesis."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you fully on the misuse of &#8220;evolution,&#8221; in that a lot of people seem to have it cross-wired with &#8220;progression.&#8221; Not to hijack the conversation too much, but what about progressivism? We don&#8217;t see much of it these days (thank you, the Right Reverend &#8220;The End of History&#8221;), but surely human *societies* have the capacity to get better, and ought to. And yes, I recognize the difference between &#8220;capacity&#8221; and &#8220;ought,&#8221; so treat them as two separate questions, Mr. Has-a-real-job. I ask because I&#8217;ve been reading a lot of Ernst Bloch lately and rather like utopianism as a defensible moral and ethical position.</p>
<p>While I&#8217;m injecting my scattered thoughts all around, I might also mention the following. While I, like you and (Bill Quinn, from whom I stole the quote), &#8220;hate people who don&#8217;t have control over their own semantic fields,&#8221; you have to at least acknowledge that one person (or three, or twenty people) probably aren&#8217;t going to stop the memetic*/semantic shift of &#8220;evolution&#8221; to &#8220;progression.&#8221; It&#8217;s frustrating, but it&#8217;s the way language works.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re likely to get a linguist in the department quite soon, although unfortunately too late I think for my classwork.</p>
<p>* I mean this spelling: &#8220;meme-like evolution&#8221; as opposed to &#8220;mimesis.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
