[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FCPUNX:The Sovereign Individual - ignorant authors (fwd)
Forwarded message:
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "James A. Donald" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: FCPUNX:The Sovereign Individual - ignorant authors
> At 11:12 PM 10/9/97 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
> > This chapter deals with various aspects of social issues (eg rise of
> > national languages) and how they led to the growth of nationalism in
> > general. Toward the end of the chapter (pp. 265 in the hardback) these
> > idiots (don't know a better term) actualy have the audactity to claim that
> > Stephen Jay Gould is a neo-creationist,
>
> This appears to me to be an accurate depiction of Stephen Jay Gould's
> views. He claims that humans are fundamentally different from other
> animals in this regard, and has frequently been ridiculed on this account.
>
> I have read some of his writings, for which he was ridiculed, and the
> ridicule and contempt appears justified to me.
Well apparently you didn't comprehend what he was saying any better than the
authors of the book or your experts. However, I have no intention of bringing
this discussion onto the list past this responce. If you, or anybody else,
would like to see Gould's refutation of this claim in his own words then
refer to:
Scientist Confront Creationism
ed. L.R. Godfrey
ISBN 0-393-30154-0
Chpt. 8.
Darwin's Untimely Burial - Again!
pp. 139
This volume is a collection of articles by 15 of the top evolutionary
theorist (not all biologist) in the field. Worth the $7.95 this little book
costs.
You might also want to read "The Mismeasure of Man" (again).
> I have read a fair bit of Gould. His work on the evolution of non humans is
> perfectly plausible though controversial.
>
> His work on humans is shear crap and is not regarded by the relevant experts
> in the relevant fields as legitimate science.
[rhetorical questions, please don't send responces]
So your premise is that the evolutionary processes which form non-humans are
not the same forces acting on humans? You seriously mis-understand not only
Gould but modern evolutionary theory in toto. Sounds like you and not Gould
have embraced neo-creationism.
What relevant experts? THE relevent expert in evolutionary biology is Ernst
Meyr. Are you claiming that Meyr doesn't know what he is talking about?
Gould's premise, supported by Meyr and most other evolutionary biologist,
is that the human being is in fact a radicaly different animal than all
others. Not because of some magical force of transcendance but rather a
easily understand mechanism. The increase of cerebral capacity in concert
with exo-cerebral capacity (ie memory outside the brain), abstract
thinking, and language provide humans the tools to escape the purely
evolutionary process. Gould's claim, and what pisses so many people off, is
that man has reached a point where the major force in future development is
NOT evolutionary processes. It is quite similar to what happens when you have
10 computers sitting in a room and what happens when those 10 computers are
networked and given large hard-drives.
You don't get evolution, you get revolution.
[that's as close to relevancy to this list as I can manage]
____________________________________________________________________
| |
| The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there |
| be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. |
| |
| -Alan Greenspan- |
| |
| _____ The Armadillo Group |
| ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA |
| /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ |
| .', |||| `/( e\ |
| -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate |
| [email protected] |
| 512-451-7087 |
|____________________________________________________________________|