Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Criticizing neo-Darwinism
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 136 of 309 (399238)
05-04-2007 3:23 PM


Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
Atheist Nietzsche apparently ridiculed contemporary darwinism in his last work
Die Gtzen-Dmmerung - Twilight of the Idols
http://www.handprint.com/SC/NIE/GotDamer.html
quote:
Anti-Darwin. ” As for the famous "struggle for existence," so far it seems to me to be asserted rather than proved. It occurs, but as an exception; the total appearance of life is not the extremity, not starvation, but rather riches, profusion, even absurd squandering ” and where there is struggle, it is a struggle for power. One should not mistake Malthus for nature.
Assuming, however, that there is such a struggle for existence ” and, indeed, it occurs ” its result is unfortunately the opposite of what Darwin's school desires, and of what one might perhaps desire with them ” namely, in favor of the strong, the privileged, the fortunate exceptions. The species do not grow in perfection: the weak prevail over the strong again and again, for they are the great majority ” and they are also more intelligent. Darwin forgot the spirit (that is English!); the weak have more spirit. One must need spirit to acquire spirit; one loses it when one no longer needs it. Whoever has strength dispenses with the spirit ("Let it go!" they think in Germany today; "the Reich must still remain to us"). It will be noted that by "spirit" I mean care, patience, cunning, simulation, great self-control, and everything that is mimicry (the latter includes a great deal of so-called virtue).
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by DrJones*, posted 05-04-2007 4:54 PM MartinV has replied
 Message 144 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-05-2007 10:33 AM MartinV has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 137 of 309 (399255)
05-04-2007 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by MartinV
05-04-2007 3:23 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
What does a philosopher's opinion on biology matter?

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 3:23 PM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 5:18 PM DrJones* has replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 138 of 309 (399260)
05-04-2007 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by DrJones*
05-04-2007 4:54 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
What does a philosopher's opinion on biology matter?
And what does a graduated theologist Darwin's opinion on biology matter?
----
In his finals in January 1831, Darwin performed well in theology and, having scraped through in classics, mathematics and physics, came tenth out of a pass list of 178.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by DrJones*, posted 05-04-2007 4:54 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by DrJones*, posted 05-04-2007 5:26 PM MartinV has replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 139 of 309 (399261)
05-04-2007 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by MartinV
05-04-2007 5:18 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
And what does a graduated theologist Darwin's opinion on biology matter?
well first your quote does not say that he graduated as a theologist, just that it was one of the areas he studied in. His study of biology outside of a formal school is pretty well known. What connection (formal or not) to biology did Nietzsche have?

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 5:18 PM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 5:45 PM DrJones* has replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 140 of 309 (399266)
05-04-2007 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by DrJones*
05-04-2007 5:26 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
well first your quote does not say that he graduated as a theologist,
quote:
In 1828 he (Darwin) entered Cambridge University to study theology getting a degree in 1831.
http://users.hol.gr/~dilos/prehis/prerm2.htm
quote:
He (Darwin) then went to Cambridge University to study theology.
Discover | Natural History Museum
quote:
It would surprise many to know that Charles Darwin, the founder of modern evolutionary theory, was not a scientist but a theologian. Darwin only had a divinity degree and no formal training in the sciences.
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/24422.html
I don't see why you appreciate more biological opininion of gratuated theologist from mid 19 century more than opinion of prominent linguist and philosopher from the same period.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by DrJones*, posted 05-04-2007 5:26 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2007 2:27 AM MartinV has replied
 Message 142 by DrJones*, posted 05-05-2007 2:53 AM MartinV has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 141 of 309 (399336)
05-05-2007 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by MartinV
05-04-2007 5:45 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
I don't see why you appreciate more biological opininion of gratuated theologist from mid 19 century more than opinion of prominent linguist and philosopher from the same period.
(1) Darwin spent his life studying biology and was recognised by his peers as the greatest naturalist of his age.
Frierich Nietzsche knew nothing of biology, wrote a lot of crazy stuff, went mad, and spent the latter half of his life staring at the wall while his sister displayed him to tourists.
Which of them knew more about biology?
(2) We are not taking Darwin's word for anything. The theory of evolution does not rest on his opinion, but on the facts.
However, if you are going to invoke the Argument from Authority, here are some scientists with scientific qualifications.
Chew on these.
"Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin."
--- Albanian Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina; Australian Academy of Science; Austrian Academy of Sciences; Bangladesh Academy of Sciences; The Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium; Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; The Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada; Academia Chilena de Ciencias; Chinese Academy of Sciences; Academia Sinica, China, Taiwan; Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences; Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences; Cuban Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic; Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters; Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt; Académie des Sciences, France; Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities; The Academy of Athens, Greece; Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Indian National Science Academy; Indonesian Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran; Royal Irish Academy; Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities; Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy; Science Council of Japan; Kenya National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic; Latvian Academy of Sciences; Lithuanian Academy of Sciences; Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academia Mexicana de Ciencias; Mongolian Academy of Sciences; Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco; The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences; Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand; Nigerian Academy of Sciences; Pakistan Academy of Sciences; Palestine Academy for Science and Technology; Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru; National Academy of Science and Technology, The Philippines; Polish Academy of Sciences; Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal; Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Singapore National Academy of Sciences; Slovak Academy of Sciences; Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academy of Science of South Africa; Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain; National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka; Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Council of the Swiss Scientific Academies; Academy of Sciences, Republic of Tajikistan; Turkish Academy of Sciences; The Uganda National Academy of Sciences; The Royal Society, UK; US National Academy of Sciences; Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences; Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela; Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences; The Caribbean Academy of Sciences; African Academy of Sciences; The Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS); The Executive Board of the International Council for Science (ICSU).
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 5:45 PM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by MartinV, posted 05-05-2007 3:55 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 142 of 309 (399337)
05-05-2007 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by MartinV
05-04-2007 5:45 PM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
I don't see why you appreciate more biological opininion of gratuated theologist from mid 19 century more than opinion of prominent linguist and philosopher from the same period.
What does a linguist and philosopher know about biology? Darwin spent his life outside of school studying the natural world, what knowledge of biology did Neitzsche have?
also: what Dr. Adequate said.

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 5:45 PM MartinV has not replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 143 of 309 (399348)
05-05-2007 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Dr Adequate
05-05-2007 2:27 AM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
"Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin."
I don't see problem with this extract. Might be atheist Nietzsche would agree too if he head been alive. You see - the quotation do not mentioned darwinism as explanation of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2007 2:27 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-26-2007 7:52 AM MartinV has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 144 of 309 (399382)
05-05-2007 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by MartinV
05-04-2007 3:23 PM


Re: Fridriech [sic] Nietzsche, quotemined
Nietzsche is quoted too often by people that can't be bothered to learn anything about his philosophy.
Nietzsche's criticism in this excerpt is of a brand of nineteenth-century positivism that claimed support in Darwinian theory. He uses the same theory to expose the naivete of it.
Nietzsche was not a creo. Sorry. And the spelling of his first name is Friedrich, not 'Fridriech.'
Now--back to the twenty-first century.
_____

Archer
All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by MartinV, posted 05-04-2007 3:23 PM MartinV has not replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 145 of 309 (402305)
05-25-2007 5:05 PM


G.B.Shaw on darwinism
I quoted Friedrich Nietzsche and Nabokov who dismissed darwinism. Maybe these poets - to be ironic - did not underestand complicated dialectical "science" of neodarwinism with it's theories of sexaul selection, neutral drift or even that of neutral draft etc. But G.B.Shaw opinion of darwinism and especially of Natural selection seems to be of the same sort:
quote:
...the Darwinian process may be described as a chapter of accidents. As such, it seems simple, because you do not at first realize all that involves. But when its whole significance dawns on you, your heart sinks into a heap of sand within you. There is a hideous fatalism about it, a ghastly and damnable reduction of beauty and intelligence, of strength and purpose, of honor and aspiration, to such casually picturesque changes as an avalanche may make in landscape, or a railway accident in a human figure. To call this Natural Selection is a blasphemy, possible to many for whom Nature is nothing but a casual aggregation of inert and dead matter, but eternally impossible to the spirits and souls of the righteous. If it be no blasphemy, but a truth of science, then the stars of heaven, the showers and dew, the winter and summer, the fire and heat, the mountains and hills, may no longer be called to exalt the Lord with us by praise: their work is to modify all things by blindly starving and murdering everything that is not lucky enough to survive in the universal struggle for hogwash." (Shaw 1921, p. xliv-xlvi).

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by DrJones*, posted 05-25-2007 5:20 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 147 by Zhimbo, posted 05-25-2007 5:24 PM MartinV has not replied
 Message 148 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-26-2007 7:48 AM MartinV has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 146 of 309 (402309)
05-25-2007 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by MartinV
05-25-2007 5:05 PM


Re: G.B.Shaw on darwinism
But G.B.Shaw opinion of darwinism and especially of Natural selection seems to be of the same sort:
And what was Shaw's background in biology?

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by MartinV, posted 05-25-2007 5:05 PM MartinV has not replied

  
Zhimbo
Member (Idle past 6011 days)
Posts: 571
From: New Hampshire, USA
Joined: 07-28-2001


Message 147 of 309 (402310)
05-25-2007 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by MartinV
05-25-2007 5:05 PM


Re: G.B.Shaw on darwinism
Of course, this quote in no way questions the plausibility of Darwinism, or the evidence. It only wishes to avoid some supposed spiritual ramifications that were not to playwright Shaw's liking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by MartinV, posted 05-25-2007 5:05 PM MartinV has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 148 of 309 (402387)
05-26-2007 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by MartinV
05-25-2007 5:05 PM


Re: G.B.Shaw on darwinism
I quoted Friedrich Nietzsche and Nabokov who dismissed darwinism. Maybe these poets - to be ironic - did not underestand complicated dialectical "science" of neodarwinism with it's theories of sexaul selection, neutral drift or even that of neutral draft etc. But G.B.Shaw opinion of darwinism and especially of Natural selection seems to be of the same sort.
You mean, devoid of factual content?
Here's Shaw on smallpox vaccination, by the way:
quote:
For years past the strain of countenancing such a proceeding, so gross, reckless, dirty, and dangerous as vaccination from the calf, has been growing unbearable to bacteriological experts. . . . Nothing but the natural ignorance of the public, countenanced by the inoculated erroneousness of the ordinary general medical practitioners, makes such a barbarism as vaccination possible. . . Recent developments have shown that an inoculation made in the usual general practitioner's light-hearted way, without previous highly skilled examination of the state of the patient's blood, is just as likely to be a simple manslaughter as a cure or preventive. But vaccination is nothing short of attempted murder. A skilled bacteriologist would just as soon think of cutting his child's arm and rubbing the contents of the dustpan into the wound, as vaccinating it in the same.
Yes, that's smallpox, the disease we wiped from the face of the earth by vaccination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by MartinV, posted 05-25-2007 5:05 PM MartinV has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 149 of 309 (402388)
05-26-2007 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by MartinV
05-05-2007 3:55 AM


Re: Fridriech Nietzsche on darwinism
I don't see problem with this extract.
You've become an evolutionist? Hurrah.
Might be atheist Nietzsche would agree too if he head been alive. You see - the quotation do not mentioned darwinism as explanation of evolution.
They do not use the obsolote term "darwinism". They do however, say that: "Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision."
Now, these "ways" would be descent with modification and natural selection, yes?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by MartinV, posted 05-05-2007 3:55 AM MartinV has not replied

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5828 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 150 of 309 (403040)
05-31-2007 3:31 PM


"Empty niche" explanation is probably wrong
Darwinists here explained diversification (adaptive radiation) of mammalian orders during Eocene because of empty niches after K/T period and extinction of dinosaurs due Yucatan catastrophe. They argued that when all emptied niches after dinosaurus extinction were re-occupied by suddenly evolved mammals no other mammalian order arose. I interpreted this fact observed first by Broom and Davison as slow down or end of evolutionary process.
Yet according a research published in Nature 30.4.1998 this radiation occured before K/T period when dinosaurus obviously occupied all niches. I would like to know what interpretation of origin of mammalian orders before K/T period darwinists conceive in such a case. How would they explain that almost all mammalian orders arose in very distant past where no emptied niches were available. After that period no mammalian order arose.
quote:
At least five lineages of placental mammals
arose more than 100 million years ago, and most of the modern
orders seem to have diversified before the Cretaceous/Tertiary
extinction of the dinosaurs.
...and that most mammalian orders were involved in a Cretaceous radiation that predated the Cretaceous/Tertiary extinction of the dinosaurs (Fig. 3). The origin of most mammalian orders seems not to be tied to the filling of niches left vacant by dinosaurs, but is more likely to be related to events in Earth history 12.
Amolecular timescale for vertebrate evolution
Sudhir Kumar & S. Blair Hedges
http://www.kumarlab.net/pdf_new/KumarHedges98.pdf
------------
This post would fit more on "is evolution of mammals finished" but the thread was closed. So I put it here.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.
Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2007 7:15 AM MartinV has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024