Xref: utzoo sci.bio:3759 sci.chem:2325
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!jarthur!purves
From: purves@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Bill Purves)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.chem
Subject: Re: Forgotten Entities: Do You Remember Any?
Keywords: protoplasm
Message-ID: <9413@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Date: 30 Oct 90 07:44:23 GMT
References: <1990Oct25.232546.12357@portia.Stanford.EDU> <1990Oct26.072420.28005@cec1.wustl.edu> <90300.133611JAHAYES@MIAMIU.BITNET> <1990Oct30.030717.8923@midway.uchicago.edu> <3870@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Followup-To: sci.bio
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Lines: 17

In article <3870@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> minsky@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:
>Protoplasm.  The stuff inside cells.  It was a big thing when I went
>to grade school.  Do they still talk about it?

No.  About thirty years ago, Garrett Hardin used to campaign against
the term, likening it to the word "flame" (in the sense of a candle
flame)--something that's there but that isn't an object.  "Protoplasm"
was a slightly useful term when people didn't know what "protoplasm"
consists of.  Now we simply speak of its constituents, although the
word lingers as a non-technical term, usually in flowery prose.

(bill)
-- 
William K.  Purves                       (714) 621-8021
Department of Biology                    purves@jarthur.claremont.edu
Harvey Mudd College                      PURVES@HMCVAX.BITNET       
Claremont, CA 91711