[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
I certainly agree that another term is needed for "theory." Like many of
you, I've probably suffered the "evolution is only a theory" line so many
times that it triggers an allergic reaction.
And I agree that hyperthesis fits the current scientific convention.
However, I think this idea fails to address the problem of separating
public perception from scientific consensus. The term "hyperthesis"
itself is so aloof that I can't imagine using it in general conversation.
Referring to the "evolutionary hyperthesis" would only earn a glassy-eyed
stare. I'm not sure it does anything to drive the point home that "this
is more than a guess, dammit."
DEVIL'S TOWER sampler at http://www.inlink.com/~range