--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "BruceD" <blroadies@...> wrote: > We agree that adaptation isn't best described in mechanical > terms. But does your example serve? I deliberately choose a very simple example, so that it was clear to Stuart that I was not assuming anything non-physical. Even then, Stuart seems to say that I am assuming something non-physical. Sure, there would be better examples, where a case can be made that the adaptive behavior is purposive. Regards, Neil ========================================= Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/