1.1 17 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Dennett I 262<br /> The "Rule of the Local" is a basic principle of Darwinism. It corresponds to the principle that there is no Creator, no intelligent foresight. 1 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism McGinn II 98 <br /> Design argument/William Paley: organisms have a brilliant design: We have not designed them, so we have to assume that a foreign intelligence did it. Let us call this intelligence "God". So God exists. <br /> ---<br /> II 98<br /> DarwinVsPaley: intelligent design does not require a Creator. Selection is sufficient. <br /> ---<br /> II 98<br /> Mind/Consciousness/Evolution/McGinn: evolution does not explain consciousness - nor sensations. <br /> ---<br /> II 99<br /> Reason: sensation and consciousness cannot be explained through the means of Darwinian principles and physics, because if selection were to explain how sensations are supposed to be created by it, it must be possible to mold the mind from matter. <br /> ---<br /> II 100<br /> ((s) Consciousness or sensations would have to be visible for selection.) (Similar GouldVsDawkins). 2 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Popper Mayr I 87 <br /> Darwinism/PopperVsDarwinism: (Popper 1974): "no verifiable theory, but a metaphysical research program ...." this criticism was later revoked by Popper. ><a href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-list.php?concept=Darwinism">Darwinism</a>, ><a href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-list.php?concept=Evolution">Evolution</a>. 3 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Putnam 4 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Rorty 5 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Dawkins I 40<br /> Darwinism/Dawkins: In reality the "survival of the best-adapted" is a special case of the law of the continuity of the stable.<br /> I 373<br /> Gene/Darwinism/Dawkins: Darwinism speaks about the survival of individuals as a whole. Here, the paradox disappears that a gene might act against an individual. What is good for survival is good for all genes. 6 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Eigen I 188<br /> Darwin/Life/Eigen: Darwin's teaching should not be called Darwinism, it can be traced back to fundamental principles! Where the boundary conditions are fulfilled, it is a law. (><a href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-list.php?concept=Theories">Theory</a>, ><a href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-list.php?concept=Laws">Laws</a>). 7 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Gould I 70<br /> Darwin/Gould: Darwin's theory of selection represents a creative transfer of Adam Smiths' fundamental thesis of a rational economy to biology: Equilibrium and order are not created by a higher, external (divine) power or by the existence of laws that directly affect the whole, but by the struggle between individuals for their own advantage. (Modern variant: to transfer their genes to future generations through a particular success in reproduction). <br /> II 9<br /> Darwinism/Adaptation/Gould: Darwin's disciples later designed a version of his theory that was much narrower than Darwin himself would ever have allowed: this "adaptionist program" referred evolution to every single part of the body, ignoring the fact that organisms are integrated entities whose development potential is limited by inheritance. (GouldVs.)<br /> II 11<br /> This exaggerated strict Darwinism emphasizes the numerous, small random variations and implies that macroevolution is a summation of the countless small steps. <br /> This "extrapolationist" theory denied macroevolution every independence.<br /> It would thus also deny the other levels, both below (e. g. genes) and above (species) any direct causal significance.<br /> II 171<br /> Definition Strict Darwinism/Gould: Thesis: All characteristics are adaptations, and evolution as a whole is a struggle for survival at the lowest level between all individuals. 8 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Kauffman I 27<br /> Evolution/KauffmanVsDarwin: according to his theory, evolution takes place solely through the gradual accumulation of advantageous variants.<br /> KauffmanVs: after that, the first multicellular organisms would have developed apart! This was apparently not the case: one of the most enigmatic features of the Cambrian explosion is that the taxonomic system was filled up from top to bottom. 9 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Mayr I 135<br /> Darwin/Science Theory/Mayr: we speak of Darwin's first and second revolution.<br /> 1) Acknowledgement of evolution through common descent.<br /> A) Replace supernatural by natural explanation,<br /> B) Replace the linear model with a complex one.<br /> 2) Natural selection: refutation of the theory of acquired traits, refutation of mixed inheritance, discovery of the source of genetic diversity (mutation, genetic recombination, diploidy). 10 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Nietzsche Pfotenhauer I 5<br /> Darwinism/Evolution/Nietzsche/NietzscheVsDarwinism/Pfotenhauer: Darwin's theory of evolution, which makes selection into a principle according to the measure (...) of selection performances to external conditions, is not liked by Nietzsche; he even hates it: "[...]this is the moral.... the middle ones are worth more than the exceptions"..."I am appalled by the formulation [of this] moral." Added Fragments, Spring 1888, KGW VIII, p. 95ff).<br /> --- <br /> Danto III 197<br /> Darwinism/NietzscheVsDarwinism/Nietzsche/DantoVsNietzsche/Danto: Nietzsche falls too often into the stupidest misconceptions of Darwinism by equating survival with excellence. He overlooks what Th. H. Huxley has already noticed:<br /> Evolution/Darwinism/Huxley, T. H.: the slightest change in the chemical composition of our atmosphere is enough to ensure that perhaps only a few lichens survive and thus become the masters of the world. <br /> ---<br /> Danto III 268<br /> Darwinism/NietzscheVsDarwinism/Nietzsche/Danto: Nietzsche was convinced VsDarwin that the disabled survive and the abled ones perish. <br /> Danto: apart from this tenacious belief, which is as easily attacked by Huxley's famous refutation as its flip side (See <a href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=1026565&a=$a&first_name=Thomas%20Henry&author=Huxley&concept=Darwinism">Darwinism/Huxley, Th. H.), it is difficult to see why Nietzsche wanted people to see him as an anti-Darwinist.
Danto III 269
Survival/Nietzsche: According to Nietzsche, whether you preserve yourself or not has nothing to do with the blind exercise of the will to power, which characterizes every thing at every moment. Something survives, insofar as it emerges victoriously from the struggle of the will; but it does not fight to survive - if so, it would be exactly the other way round: above all, something alive wants to omit its power - life itself is the will to power: self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most frequent consequences of it. (F. Nietzsche: Jenseits von Gut und Böse, KGW VI. 2, p. 21).
info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Singer I 61<br /> Darwinism/Animals/P. Singer: it is wrong to trouble Darwinism to justify human consumption of animals. First, the human being does not need meat to survive. Secondly, not all that is laid out in nature is an obligation: for example, a woman can give birth to a child every year, but this does not mean that it is wrong not to keep this rhythm. 12 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Strauss Pfotenhauer IV 42<br /> Darwinism/Strauss, Fr. D.: (D. Fr. Strauss, Der alte und neue Glaube, 1872, 2nd edition Leipzig, 1904, in particular p. 60ff) thesis: following Darwin's example, it can be shown that all events have always been a higher development, that even without a rational minded creator the world follows a continuously executed overall plan. For in blind natural phenomena and the worst of coincidences, only the more viable will prevail in the end, which for Strauss also means morally better things.<br /> ---<br /> Pfotenhauer IV 43<br /> NietzscheVsStrauss: In contrast, Nietzsche reminds us of "the nameless sufferings of humanity", which inadvertently scorn such "truly nefarious ways of thinking", (F: Nietzsche, David Strauss der Bekenner und Schriftsteller, 6; Nietzsche KGW III, 1, p. 188) this "shameless philistine optimism" (p. 187). 13 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Huxley Danto III 197<br /> Darwinism/NietzscheVsDarwinism/Nietzsche/DantoVsNietzsche/Danto: All too often Nietzsche falls into the stupidest misconceptions of Darwinism by equating survival with excellence. He overlooks what Th. H. Huxley has already noticed:<br /> Evolution/Darwinism/Huxley, Th. H.: the slightest change in the chemical composition of our atmosphere is enough to ensure that perhaps only a few lichens survive and thus become the masters of the world. 14 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Koestler Gould I 40<br /> Darwinism/Arthur KoestlerVsDarwinsmus: has fought in his last years a fight against the Darwinism he misunderstood. He gives the example of a development that has taken place twice, once on the mainland and once on an island. <SUP>(1)</SUP><br /> GouldVsKoestler: The answer to this must be: that one must deny energetically that highly convergent living beings are actually identical with each other.<br /> <br /> 1. A. Koestler, The Case of the Midwife Toad, London, NY 1971. 15 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Vavilov Gould II 132ff<br /> Darwinism/Variation/Evolution/Vavilov/Gould: Vavilov had collected barley, oats and millet from a wide variety of different breeds of wheat from various locations, and noted that within the different species of a genus, but also frequently within the species of related groups, remarkably similar series of varieties could be found.<br /> Law of Homologues series in Variation/Vavilov: Thesis: The new species arise by developing genetic differences that rule out crossbreeding with related species.<br /> But the new species is not all genetically different from its ancestors. Most of them remain untouched. The parallel variations thus represent the "play through" of the same genetic abilities, which are inherited as blocks of one species to another.<br /> Gould: Darwin does not disagree with such a thesis, since it gives the selection an important role.<br /> The variation is only the raw material. It arises in all directions and is at least not arranged in an adaptive way. The direction is slowly being determined by natural selection, as the more adapted generations proliferate. <br /> However, if the possibilities are very limited and one species shows all of its different varieties, then this choice cannot be explained by selection alone. That's how Vavilov sets himself apart from Darwin. <br /> VavilovVsDarwin: Variation does not take place in all directions, but in classes that are analogous to those of chemistry and crystallography.<br /> GoudlVsVavilov: Vavilov underlined the creative role of the environment. 16 info:srw/schema/1/dc-v1.1 XML Darwinism Kropotkin Brocker I I26<br /> Darwinism/Kropotkin: Kropotkin saw himself as a Darwinist, but rejected the evolution theorist from his students. According to Kropotkin, Darwin was "quite right when he saw in the social characteristics of man the main factor for his further development, and Darwin's vulgarizing successors are completely wrong when they claim the opposite". <SUP>(1)</SUP><br /> VsKropotkin/VsSocial Darwinism: 1. Both are guilty of naturalistic failure: to derive a "shall" from being. Darwin himself, on the other hand, only tried to provide a description and explanation for the emergence and development of life in nature, and not to derive instructions for action from it. <br /> CantzenVsKropotkin: 2. Both Kropotkin and the social Darwinism he criticized appear with the claim of a natural science and try to present mutual help as a law of nature. Kropotkin does not reflect on the relationship between the natural environment and the social environment. However, this is a historical relationship and not a law of nature. <SUP>(2)</SUP><br /> <br /> <br /> 1. Pjotr Alexejewitsch Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, London 1902. Dt.: Peter Kropotkin, Gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt. Mit einem Nachwort neu herausgegeben von Henning Ritter, Frankfurt/M./Berlin/Wien 1975, S. 113.f. <br /> 2. Rolf Cantzen, Weniger Staat – mehr Gesellschaft. Freiheit – Ökologie – Anarchismus, Frankfurt/M. 1987 , S. 23. 17