[MD] Alternatives to the scientific method

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:

> Jeez Platt, have you heard nothing of evolution since Darwin ? More
> than a century of evidence ... he chose his language and metaphors for
> his audience at the time.

Oh no. Not the usual insult to begin a conversation. I was hoping . . . 

> Anyway, you are interpreting one sentence, which is open to other
> interpretations than the purely linguistic allusions your analysis
> suggests. Struggle yes, survival yes, in the face of "scarce
> resources" of various kinds, but struggle can be overcome by reducing
> barriers and dependencies, as well as brute force.

Any specific examples of reducing barriers and dependencies that led to new
species?

> Your "sound-bite" simplification is misleading. These are "powerful"
> processes yes, but they do not have to exert physical power - subtley,
> guile, creativity, keeping a low-profile, quid-pro-quo, collaborative
> / co-evolution / symbiosis,  will do just as well .... to start making
> any sense of examples, you need to separate the genomes (and memes)
> from the host phenotypes - the "selfish" application of force
> generally has little to do with the individuals of the species
> exerting force. This was Dawkins point but like Darwin's "Survival of
> the Fittest", his "Selfish Gene" sound-bite get's mis-used with
> minimal understanding.

Well, I open to further understanding. If you can give some concrete examples
to illustrate your or Dawkin's generalities it would help. 

 > Have you read Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" (for example). If
> you haven't it would be a good place to start - he's a good writer for
> the lay reader (like me) and meticulously balanced in acknowledging
> the alternative views of those who would disagree with him on many
> points - like Gould, Lewontin and others ... Dawkins writing is too
> sure of itself IMHO, and your rhetoric would chop his down at the
> knees in five minutes. ;-) The levels of disagreement are however many
> levels below these sound-bite headlines. The agreement is overwhelming
> at most levels we are discussing here.
> 
> Variety (eco-diversity) is the spice of life.

Not sure what that has to do with the subject at hand. As for Dennett, is that 
the same Dennett who wrote "Consciousness Explained?" If so, I found him singularly
unenlightening. Could you give me the gist of his view in "Darwin's Dangerous Idea?"

Thanks, 
Platt



> 
> On 8/13/07, pholden at davtv.com <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> > Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:
> >
> >
> > > Platt, survival of the fittest has nothing to do with "ruthless
> > > control". Fitness is about best quality of "fit" with environmental
> > > opportunities, ruthlessly defeating your opponents (directly or in
> > > control of resources) is only one aspect in only some cases. Fitness
> > > is about fitting, not the power of being fit.
> >
> > >From Charles Darwin: "In the survival of favoured individuals and races,
> during
> > the constantly-recurring struggle for existence, we see a powerful and
> ever-acting
> > form of selection."
> >
> > "Struggle" sounds like using "power" to me. "Struggle" also suggests action in
> > an attempt to ruthlessly control a situation to assure a positive outcome, by
> > whatever means available. Do you have evidence that evolution operates
> otherwise?
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Platt



-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/