Weren’t hard enough on Tom Wolfe, author of The Kingdom of Speech
From Jerry Coyne at Why Evolution Is True:
This weekend, National Public Radio (NPR) host Scott Simon interviewed renowned author Tom Wolfe about Wolfe’s new book The Kingdom of Speech. You can hear the five-minute interview here. I just now listened to it, but several exercised readers emailed me yesterday complaining about Wolfe’s criticisms of evolution—criticisms that weren’t called out by Simon.
Oh dear. “Anti-science” strikes again.
Jerry treats us to a long rant about the facts of “evolution” (as he understands them). But if interviewers like Simon derailed the discussion by stopping for demands for fidelity to same we would never get to hear what Wolfe has to say on the subject of The Kingdom of Speech, language.
Wolfe briefly describes his thesis, that “language had “nothing to do with the theory of evolution”. Yet we have plenty of evidence that language in humans does have some evolutionary basis, and I’ll talk about that in a few days. Clearly language is heavily influenced by culture as well: if it wasn’t, everybody would speak the same language. But there is substantial morphological, behavioral, and neurological evidence that the ability to use semantic language, which is something unique to humans, is based on our genes, and probably evolved by natural selection.
Wolfe’s alternative “mnemonic” theory has its own problems, for the claim that language is a way to help us remember the names of things leaves no space for its primary function: communication with others.
It’s shameful that NPR is, in effect, promoting creationism and a shoddy theory of language. More.
Coyne has offered to be interviewed by NPR, which might be interesting if he can stick to the subject of language.
Wolfe’s theory would make sense for Wolfe because he probably coined all those terms, like “radical chic” and the Me Decade, to help himself think, which he would need to do first in order to communicate with others. He would first need something to communicate with.
See also: NPR’s interview with Tom Wolfe on his new book: It’s hardly surprising that Wolfe was attracted to this topic because his specialty is debunking pretensions, and Darwinism is ripe for debunking. Efforts to pretend that orangutans sort of speak are ridiculous but people are forced to take them seriously, or anyway, pretend to.
and
Can we talk? Language as the business end of consciousness
Follow UD News at Twitter!
From the first comment on Coyne piece:
“POINT TO REMEMBER: Just because someone labels themselves an “Atheist” doesn’t mean that they’re not an idiot, as well”
Thanks for the reminder?
Excellent post. I especially enjoyed the following:
“Efforts to pretend that orangutans sort of speak are ridiculous but people are forced to take them seriously, or anyway, pretend to.”
Priceless!
Darkly wry, as ever, ppolish. Viscerally witty, even ! You make me laugh from the pit of my stomach.
As to these ‘non-free-will’ claims made by the neuronal illusion named Coyne:
Actually, no we don’t:
as to this claim:
So? That still does not even begin to explain the unique ability of humans to understand and create information:
as to this claim
Actually, Darwinian evolution can’t even explain where the information for a single gene and/or protein came from, much less can Darwinian evolution explain how genes could possibly give us the unique ability to understand and create information.
Of related supplemental note:
Does anybody even care what Coyne or his cat think?
I believe that this discussion should end when Coyne is trying to make his point, which is more, and more beyond reason. He is entitled to his opinion, but others need to reevaluate it as well. If they agree with Jerry’s whatever sh.. they need to take responsibility for it…
It just bugs me, Axel, that the comment guy is implying that atheist Mr Wolfe is an idiot. Just some Darwinian “Master of the Universe” showing Mr Wolfe who’s boss grrrr:) Anyway, looking forward to reading “Kingdom of Speech”.
Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities;
all is vanity.
Ecclesiastes 1:2
Thomas Wolfe isn’t an idiot duh – but maybe an IDiot? In audience at about the 2:45 mark:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aFPhTDfcbrA
Oh yeah. some folks would oppose someone on NPR questioning evolution. iN fact it seems the host has a duty to defend evolution. Its not neutral.
There is no evidence for any neuro, bio, evo origin foe language.
Its just sounds memorized by very intelligent beings.
Animals all have language. They just are really, really, dumb.
Call me anti-animalitic if you must!
J-Mac, yes! Many people care what Coyne thinks because he is a noted public intellectual. His writing is clear and well argued, although he can be somewhat autocratic. He is elderly and makes no apology for this authoritarianism, and his writing is of such quality he doesn’t need to.
He is also a scholar and has published, and I believe still publishes peer reviewed articles, something somewhat lacking from the ID crew.
I’m betting Wolfe’s “Kingdom of Speech” outsells Coyne’s “Evolution is True” by orders of magnitude. Insight vs Dogma, woof.
“Many people care what Coyne thinks because he is a noted public intellectual.”
Should not Coyne actually exist as a person, instead of a neuronal illusion, before people can possibly care about what he thinks?
I think of Coyne less as an ‘intellectual’ than as a child-man. He refers to food as ‘noms’ and can’t stop posting pictures of his meals, shows off his collection of cowboy boots, imagining that anyone else is interested, posts the same picture of Chicago every couple of weeks, writes dogs as d*gs and pretends to dislike them (who doesn’t like dogs?) and in nearly all ways appears, on his site, like someone full into the Peter Pan Syndrome.
He is an excellent writer, when he wants to be. I’ll give him that.
As for ‘autocratic’ and ‘authoritarian’, if those words are meant to stand in for thin-skinned and vindictive, then I guess I could agree.
OT:
OT:
ppolish, BA77 has taken up the cudgels now – and everything he says sounds highly comical, simply because it is so obviously true. I think only the intrinsic humour prevents our apologists from despairing at the madness.
Having to state the obvious in the context of a quite cerebral blog, like this, cannot but plunge the rational apologist into a weird sense of surreal – of somehow having taken a wrong turning and ended up in Bedlam.
rvb8 wrote:
J-Mac, yes! Many people care what Coyne thinks because he is a noted public intellectual. His writing is clear and well argued, although he can be somewhat autocratic. He is elderly and makes no apology for this authoritarianism, and his writing is of such quality he doesn’t need to.
He is also a scholar and has published, and I believe still publishes peer reviewed articles, something somewhat lacking from the ID crew.
Well, to put things simple, what kind of intellectual, scientist and atheists goes on public television and when asked about what convinced him to biogenesis he says that? “…just because scientist have not resolved this problem, it doesn’t mean they will not…” without providing one piece of evidence that convinced him toward biogenesis. Who in the right frame of mind would listen to Coyne? Can you give me few good reasons?I just can’t comprehend it…
OT:
Yes Axel, BA77 is a wonderful cudgelist:)
Just ordered “Kingdom of Speech”. #1 Amazon bestseller (Evolution) and #22 (Science Overall).
Unguided purposeless NeoDarwinistic Evolution does NOT apply to humans, right. That is obvious, right? Humans a thousand years from now will have been guided by mind – not by a blind watchmaker right?
How about future dogs & cats? Mind or blind watchmaker? Rhetorical question lol;)
Dominion requires/demands love and respect btw. Love mainly.
Coyne is continuing his crusade, this time targeting the New York Times.
One of the features of Coyne, and his site which he has ensured through his ‘roolz’ (another cutesy, child-man, word of his, like ‘noms’ and d*gs’) remains an echo chamber of dittoheads, is the complete lack of self awareness leading to a continual flow of unintended irony.
He begins his newest gripe with, ‘What would a major newspaper do if they were discussing the views of a famous scientist who went off the rails about something unrelated to their profession? ‘
Yes, Jerry Coyne, who wrote ‘Facts vs Faith’ despite having only a one-sided, completely inept understanding of religious faith, actually wrote that.
…the unintended irony continues:
a comment below his newest tirade, against the NYT
“It’s unfortunate that people are deemed experts in all fields based upon past work in some fields. When opinion is wrapped in the cloak of scholarship, we all suffer. It happens too often and Wolfe is no exception.”
Yes, it DOES happen too often….. 🙂
Actually soundberger, the biggest abusers of the ‘I’m an expert in this field’, syndrome are the religious when they can get away with it. I visit ‘answersingenesis’ regularly to keep up with the ‘latest’ scientific advances in the furtile ground of Barminology(forgive the spelling). The amount of ‘experts’, ‘Phds’, and other assorted professionals wheeled out by Ken is quite amazing.
Also, they have a tendency to not like criticism from atheists whom they regularly accuse of Biblical Illiteracism. (Is that a word?)
Coyne annoys me too, with his nonsense words, but his clear stance on the stupidity of the politically correct brigade, and Leftist Islamic apologists is strong.
#23 rvb8 writes, “Coyne annoys me too, with his nonsense words, but his clear stance on the stupidity of the politically correct brigade…”
Yet, Coyne’s biased and unabashed antipathy toward all things religious has rendered him a hypocrite on even this, one of his pet issues. He strives to present himself as a champion of free expression on campuses, defending universities as essential bastions of free speech even if such might offend certain students whom he derides as ‘snowflakes’.
And yet. In the case of Ball State instructor Eric Hedin, Coyne behaved as the exact opposite of a champion of free speech. Hedin was a – apparently well liked and popular – teacher there who taught an ELECTIVE course on astronomy in which his own views as a Christian were freely shared with his students. Some students were, understandably annoyed, while others didn’t mind, and, again, nobody was required to take the course. But Coyne contacted the Freedom From Religion association, and together they drafted a very intimidating and angry letter that tacitly called for Hedin’s resignation. Ball State took a much more sensible stance of simply warning Hedin not to do anything that could be considered advocacy for a particular religion when teaching. I don’t think they even responded to Coyne’s and the FFR’s threats.
So much for free speech in the mind of Jerry Coyne.