from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. A blowing or fusing together, as of many instruments in a concert, or of many fires in a foundry.
- n. A blend or fusion, especially a composite reading or text formed by combining the material of two or more texts into a single text.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. A blowing together, as of many instruments in a concert, or of many fires in a foundry.
- n. a fusing together; merger of two or more things or ideas into one.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. The blowing of two or more musical instruments together.
- n. A melting or casting of metal.
- n. In diplomatics: An inadvertent combination of two readings of the same passage, so as to produce a new reading different from either.
- n. A reading which has thus originated.
Sorry, no etymologies found.
Semantics can often be a distraction, but in this case, the conflation is at least in part due to Behe's own voluntary participation in the Dover trial.
I'm so irritated that this conflation is definitely going to happen again and the thread will go down the toilet.
This type of conflation is pervasive in ID circuits.
Unfortunately that conflation is common amongst those less versed in the relevant genres since the excusatory symbolic formulation, by nature, rips off the explicatory works, simulating authenticity by simply copying from the original.
The conflation is of his own doing when they scratched out "Creator" throughout Of Pandas and People and replaced it with "Intelligent Designer".
For one article after the next to bolster that conflation is so journalistically irresponsible that it is hard to put into words.
This conflation is really unfortunate, because I set the bar pretty low for someone to be a public intellectual.
I agree, but the simple fact is that, for the vast majority of people, the conflation is a natural one, because, like so many other elements, D&D presumes a certain degree of background knowledge by its players that's increasingly no longer in evidence.
Oddly, neither attacks Lakoff at what would seem to be his central weak point, namely his conflation of politics and parenting – identifying "conservative" values with "the strict father" and "liberal" values with the "nurturant parent."
Nous voyons le monde du point de vue de Michael Beard et obtenons des bribes d'informations sur sa "conflation" et sur la façon dont cette théorie permettra de sauver le monde grâce à l'utilisation d'une énergie bon marché obtenue au moyen d'un procédé de photosynthèse artificielle, mais tout cela est facile à comprendre.