Culture Darwinism Self-Org. Theory

But then, if you shoot yourself repeatedly in the foot, why do you think you SHOULD get cheap health insurance?

Spread the love

Reading further into Suzan Mazur’s Altenberg 16: An Expose of the Evolution Industry, I learned something interesting: Scientists and philosophers who explore self-organization in evolution  also battle the armies of Fortress Tenure (trolls commanded by tax burdens).

Mazur notes that zoologist and natural philosopher Stan Salthe, visiting scholar at Binghamton University says “his skepticism about natural selection has made him “poison” in some science circles.” He’s not by any means the only one whose name comes up. Materialist atheist philosopher Jerry Fodor (MIT) joked that he was in the Witness Protection Program for his skepticism of evolutionary psychology.[!] Meanwhile, Stuart Newman of New York Medical College warns,

Unless the discourse around evolution is opened up to scientific perspectives beyond Darwinism, the education of generations to come is at risk of being sacrificed for the benefit of a dying theory.

Similarly, Swarthmore College developmental biologist Scott Gilbert tells Mazur on Darwinism,

… I’m on record in a 1996 paper saying that if the population genetics model of evolutionary biology isn’t revised by developmental genetics, it will be as relevant to biology as Newtonian physics is to current physics.

Okay, well, that’s my impression too, so let’s …  But then I read,

… When I sent my dues in to the National Center for Science Education, and I received a book called Conceptual Issues In Evolutionary Biology, there was nothing about evo-devo in it.

No, I bet there isn’t any such thing, and here is Mazur’s diggo on that subject. After which, all I can say is,

Why is Scott Gilbert paying dues to NCSE (the US national Darwin lobby)?

It was only some days ago that a reputable journal disowned NCSE Board member Barbara Forrest’s unscholarly attack on Baylor law professor Francis Beckwith. To say nothing of Executive Director Eugenie Scott’s unwholesome and disastrous meddling in the Martin Gaskell case. What good, exactly, is it doing Gilbert to be seen with these people?

Oh wait, this just in. There is a balm in Gilead. There is a phone number that recovering Darwin addicts can call, and a counselor guides them through self-empowerment steps like #3 Do not continue to voluntarily fund people who are bad for you.”

7 Replies to “But then, if you shoot yourself repeatedly in the foot, why do you think you SHOULD get cheap health insurance?

  1. 1
    GilDodgen says:

    Darwinism is the greatest threat to true scientific investigation and integrity ever devised and propagated.

    How can this not be obvious, and how ironic is it that the exact opposite is claimed, that is, that any challenge to Darwinian orthodoxy stands in the way of true scientific investigation and integrity?

  2. 2
    NZer says:

    Yeah my thinking too Gil.

  3. 3
    NZer says:

    By the way, I am posting this comment from my iPhone using the newly installed mobile theme on UD. Of course you won’t see this theme unless u r using a mobile device. Thanks webmaster!

  4. 4
    markf says:

    I urge anyone reading this post to also read the entire interview between Susan Mazur and and Scott Gilbert. At no point does he say that evolutionary theory is false or a failure, nor can she get him to say that his views are being suppressed by the establishment. The closest he gets to either is the quote in Denyse’s post and any theory that is as relevant to biology as Newtonian physics is to current physics is a massive achievement and highly relevant.

  5. 5
    O'Leary says:

    Markf at 4, thanks for urging that people read the entire interview. I’ve repeatedly recommended the entire book. Because the book was written on the fly, it gives a real sense of the ferment. I’m not aware that anyone said Gilbert’s own views were suppressed by the establishment, and – in general – in the interview, he follows the usual pattern, evidenced in many Mazur interviews, of backing off quickly after whispering “that guy got no clothes.” It’s really all they can do.

    He must be content, I suppose, with the disappointment that follows, of which he speaks.

  6. 6
    zeroseven says:

    Newtonian physics is one of the most elegant physical models ever devised and is a an incredibly useful and accurate model of the of the outside world in the majority of cases. As markf says, comparing a theory to that is a huge commendation.

  7. 7
    forests says:

    I fail to see the connection with Intelligent Design and the scientists featured in the book Altenberg 16, most of the authors in that book are supporting internal evolutionary mechanisms and that they are not shaped in some cases by any external source at all. Stuart Pivar for example even though he does not not support natural selection is a staunch materialist and critic of intelligent design, he has even published a paper in support of self-organization against any form of creationism.

    the self-organization school of evolution is the complete opposite of intelligent design.

Leave a Reply