While I understand the point the OP is trying to make, I think it's a tempest in a teapot, because the word "evolution" has a broader range of meanings than that indicated by the phrase "biological evolution."I realize "evolution" has many and varied meanings, the definition I gave as the lead in quote says as much. But, if we are just using "evolution" in the broader generic sense, why aren't these new methodologies labelled like: "The Changing Method of Software Design", or "The Working Out Approach to Software Design", or "The Unfolding Design Methodolgoy" or something similar?
I'll tell you why, it is precisely because of the biological connotations of the term 'evolution', including both the apparent scientific legitimacy of the theory, and the seemingly successful designs seen all around us as a result of biological evolution. And, the wrong, but all too common, notion that biological evolution is progressive.
In reply to Re: Re: (OT) Evolutionary Design??
by Anonymous Monk
in thread (OT) Evolutionary Design??
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |