Darwin-L Message Log 4:63 (December 1993)

Academic Discussion on the History and Theory of the Historical Sciences

This is one message from the Archives of Darwin-L (1993–1997), a professional discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.

Note: Additional publications on evolution and the historical sciences by the Darwin-L list owner are available on SSRN.

<4:63>From WILLS@macc.wisc.edu  Thu Dec 16 17:03:09 1993

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 17:05 CDT
From: Jeffrey Wills <WILLS@macc.wisc.edu>
Subject: universals
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

	Tom Cravens' distinction between "universals" and "pseudo-universals"
leads me to ask what may seem an elementary question, but what exactly do we
mean by "universals" these days? Although there is certainly a plentiful
literature on linguistic universals (e.g. B. Comrie), I have the feeling that
some writers mean Tom's "universal" (really truly all the time) and others mean
"pseudo-universal" (very frequent, commonplace). Is this sort of confusion
"universal" among the historical sciences?  Is there a terminology in use which
someone might recommend?
	Jeffrey Wills

Your Amazon purchases help support this website. Thank you!

© RJO 1995–2022