Pigliucci Challenges Randomness (Religion)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, January 20, 2010, 03:14 (5420 days ago) @ David Turell


> > As for the Natural Selection equivocation, he establishes in the same book that evolutionary theory as it stands makes no sense except in the light of natural selection. Without natural selection, you can't explain anything in biology. 
> 
> I am waiting for the release of the book: The Altenberg 16, by Suzan Mazur. Preliminary comments so far suggest that natural selection will be taking a more minor role in the new synthesis. Out next month. I think this is a proper development.-I will stress--so I don't misconstrue Pigliucci's position as being more than an acceptance of a "best current explanation." He goes out of his way in this book to describe science as a machine that is self-modifying in terms of paradigms (and actually does discuss Kuhn.) It was also written in 2002 and is therefore about 8 years out of date. -I took a look at the pre-release info at Amazon for Mazur's book, and this is the first time I've seen the public discussed in a positive light in relation to science. Most academics--myself included--tend to shun the views of the general public. Hubris, I know, but I've never pretended to be humble all the time. I will comment that I attribute much of this to the public's fight against evolution going back to Scopes and the like; I think that there's something in the human spirit that sings when someone cries war against you and it blinds you. I blame the stagnation as much upon creationists such as Hovind as I do against the scientific establishment.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"