Another young man with an AR-15...

[slapshot]

Worthy of note:
Much as you would wish otherwise, the English langauge is not a free-style event. I take it you are passing on the bonus point question?

Sadly, Mr. Moot reader, you left out the key passage from the SCIENCE article I linked:

"Technological Symbiosis

"Essentially my point is that we consider "tools" as coevolutionary developments which can be regarded in a similar manner as symbiotic relationships are in biology.

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

Wow! Right in front of your face and you still can't grasp it. Not that this is a surprising outcome.

[Dryfire]

Wow! Right in front of your face and you still can't grasp it. Not that this is a surprising outcome.

He cut his nose off with that one.

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

He cut his nose off with that one.

He sure did. You'd think the U of M would pay him to stay off the internet. It doesn't speak well for their hiring practices.

[slapshot]

Wow! Right in front of your face and you still can't grasp it. Not that this is a surprising outcome.

And you are still too myopic to see that the use of the word symbiois, as related to man and innanimate objects, like guns, computers or technology in general...has been used in countless (technical) articles, for decades.

Although it comes as no surprise to me that you are incapable of understanding complex relationships, and new interpretations that are outside your view from your basement window.

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

It is highly amusing to watch a purportedly educated adult use hundreds of words to defend the incorrect use of a single word rather than simply use the one word which would be entirely correct.

But then I'm a simple soul who allegedly doesn't get out much....

[slapshot]

It is highly amusing to watch a purportedly educated adult use hundreds of words to defend the incorrect use of a single word rather than simply use the one word which would be entirely correct.

My mistake for assuming you might actually be able to extrapolate.

So, in an effort to "dumb it down" for you, my retort (to your post above) will be reduced to one word : Ditto.

In closing, please note that I am not alone in recognizing the symbiotic relationship between man and guns:

http://www.wedealinlead.net/

The caption under the image of the Colt Paterson No 5 reads:

"THIS COLT PATERSON NO. 5 "TEXAS" MODEL PERCUSSION REVOLVER EXEMPLIFIES A SORT OF MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW: THAT IS OUR FOCUS. THIS PAGE IS ABOUT THE ALL THINGS 'GUN'. IT IS ABOUT THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP THAT HAS GONE ON FOR A MILLENNIUM BETWEEN MAN AND GUN."

[Dryfire]

My mistake for assuming you might actually be able to extrapolate.

So, in an effort to "dumb it down" for you, my retort (to your post above) will be reduced to one word : Ditto.

In closing, please note that I am not alone in recognizing the symbiotic relationship between man and guns:

http://www.wedealinlead.net/

The caption under the image of the Colt Paterson No 5 reads:

"THIS COLT PATERSON NO. 5 "TEXAS" MODEL PERCUSSION REVOLVER EXEMPLIFIES A SORT OF MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW: THAT IS OUR FOCUS. THIS PAGE IS ABOUT THE ALL THINGS 'GUN'. IT IS ABOUT THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP THAT HAS GONE ON FOR A MILLENNIUM BETWEEN MAN AND GUN."

So. Let me get this straight. If somebody misuses a word, that changes the definition and gives everybody else permission to misuse the word too. Okay

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

So. Let me get this straight. If somebody misuses a word, that changes the definition and gives everybody else permission to misuse the word too. Okay

And why not? It's not like he has, you know, standards or anything...

[slapshot]

So. Let me get this straight. If somebody misuses a word, that changes the definition and gives everybody else permission to misuse the word too. Okay

Misuse? By who's definition? Your's? MootReader's? Ok.

In the scientific community, the description of a symbiotic relation between man and machine, or other innate objects, has become a frequently used phrase, or lexicon, in scientific articles.

Words in the English language often morph beyond their original, or root meaning. The first time I saw it's use, outside of biological organisims, was in the 1960 paper by Licklidder (sp) entitled: The man-computer symbiosis.

Sorry, but not wrong here. Try thinking out of the box.

As an aside - might guns, one day, become "smart"?

[Dryfire]

Misuse? By who's definition? Your's? MootReader's? Ok.

In the scientific community, the description of a symbiotic relation between man and machine, or other innate objects, has become a frequently used phrase, or lexicon, in scientific articles.

Words in the English language often morph beyond their original, or root meaning. The first time I saw it's use, outside of biological organisims, was in the 1960 paper by Licklidder (sp) entitled: The man-computer symbiosis.

Sorry, but not wrong here. Try thinking out of the box.

As an aside - might guns, one day, become "smart"?

The sentence that you so proudly touted as backing you up clearly states "which can be regarded in a similar manner as symbiotic relationships are in biology.". It does not say it should be regarded the same as. It says similar. There is a difference. Slight but different.

But you already knew that.

[flyboy56]

CNN with Anderson Cooper is talking gun control in front of an audience. Good show.

[songfourone]

They were written as a class assignment.

Still smarter than most posters on here.

[songfourone]

Misuse? By who's definition? Your's? MootReader's? Ok.

In the scientific community, the description of a symbiotic relation between man and machine, or other innate objects, has become a frequently used phrase, or lexicon, in scientific articles.

Words in the English language often morph beyond their original, or root meaning. The first time I saw it's use, outside of biological organisims, was in the 1960 paper by Licklidder (sp) entitled: The man-computer symbiosis.

Sorry, but not wrong here. Try thinking out of the box.

As an aside - might guns, one day, become "smart"?

Just chalk it up to inability to think outside the cage

[slapshot]

The sentence that you so proudly touted as backing you up clearly states "which can be regarded in a similar manner as symbiotic relationships are in biology.". It does not say it should be regarded the same as. It says similar. There is a difference. Slight but different.

But you already knew that.

Of course I did. There are many words in the English language which are said to be misused, but need to be taken in context before one can accurately say they are being misused, and the nuances can be subtle. The top 10 words that are "misused":

http://listverse.com/2011/06/07/top-...english-words/

There is a symbiotic relationship between man and computers. But, if you would prefer, I could have said, there is a "symbiotic like" relationship between man and computers.

But many people, and especially scientists, understand the inference, the nuances based on the context of its use. Oh, and in that regards, there are many more articles that don't use a qualifier, like "similar", than do. It's understood that there is a MUTUAL, symbiotic, benefit. That's the key point.

[Dryfire]

Still smarter than most posters on here.

That's what the indoctrinated usually think.

[songfourone]

That's what the indoctrinated usually think.

Okay Bazooka Joe.