No. of Recommendations: 1
Jerry Coyne is upset:

Virtually all of the non-creationist opposition to the modern theory of evolution, and all of the minimal approbation of Shapiro’s views, come from molecular biologists. I’m not sure whether there’s something about that discipline (the complexity of molecular mechanisms?) that makes people doubt the efficacy of natural selection, or whether it’s simply that many molecular biologists don’t get a good grounding in evolutionary biology.

And now we learn that another respected philosopher (Jerry Fodor was the first) has come out against neo-Darwinism, too: the distinguished philosopher Thomas Nagel is about to issue Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Concept of Nature is Almost Certainly False.


http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/larrry-mo...

Molecular biologist are precisely the people I'd expect to have problems with evolution. And philosophers.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Molecular biologist are precisely the people I'd expect to have problems with evolution.

And, yet, the vast majority of molecular biologists do not have a problem with evolution. That should be telling.

-Anthony
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Molecular biologist are precisely the people I'd expect to have problems with evolution.

Why is that? What would/should a molecular biologist think is the mechanism that accounts for the biodiversity we see on Earth?

And philosophers.

The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.

The Second Law of Philosophy: They're both wrong.

Descartes is sitting in a bar, having a drink. The bartender asks him if he would like another. "I think not," he says and vanishes in a puff of logic.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The follow up article is interesting:

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/

What bothers me about Dupré is not so much his bringing to public attention new insights into how organisms work, for that’s a good thing. What bothers me is that, like so many others, he casts these new discoveries as things that throw the theory of evolution in crisis. And that plays into the hands of creationists, no matter how strongly Dupré decries creationism. As an evolutionary biologist—which Dupré is not—I think I’d know if my field was in crisis. Yet I haven’t heard any recent lamentations from my colleagues.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement