[MD] Alternatives to the scientific method

[ian glendinning]

Platt,

I wasn't "beginning the conversation" it started two mails earlier and
I was reacting to your expressed ignorance - not lack of knowledge,
but ignorance notice ... we've been down this road before.

Because we've been down this road many times before, I do not intend
to waste good faith in attempting to provide you with any more
explanation, unless you reciprocate the good faith - which has been my
main argument with you (personally) in recent times. Life's too short.

BTW - I agree. My review of Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" was
one word - "Hardly".

Trust me (Hah!) "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" (and so far "Breaking the
Spell" incidentally) is much more satisfying.

The gist of DDI ? - there are many awesomely beautiful ways by which
evolution progresses (and many questions) - and they undermine many
prejudices about life's means and ends - hence the "dangerous idea".

Start with "spandrels" and see where you get - the "natural
engineering solution" metaphorical alternative to intelligent design.
Thought provoking.

Ian

On 8/13/07, pholden at davtv.com <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> 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/
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>