rjohara.net Search:

# Darwin-L Message Log 24: 1–30 — August 1995

## Academic Discussion on the History and Theory of the Historical Sciences

Darwin-L was an international discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences, active from 1993–1997. Darwin-L was established to promote the reintegration of a range of fields all of which are concerned with reconstructing the past from evidence in the present, and to encourage communication among scholars, scientists, and researchers in these fields. The group had more than 600 members from 35 countries, and produced a consistently high level of discussion over its several years of operation. Darwin-L was not restricted to evolutionary biology nor to the work of Charles Darwin, but instead addressed the entire range of historical sciences from an explicitly comparative perspective, including evolutionary biology, historical linguistics, textual transmission and stemmatics, historical geology, systematics and phylogeny, archeology, paleontology, cosmology, historical geography, historical anthropology, and related “palaetiological” fields.

This log contains public messages posted to the Darwin-L discussion group during August 1995. It has been lightly edited for format: message numbers have been added for ease of reference, message headers have been trimmed, some irregular lines have been reformatted, and error messages and personal messages accidentally posted to the group as a whole have been deleted. No genuine editorial changes have been made to the content of any of the posts. This log is provided for personal reference and research purposes only, and none of the material contained herein should be published or quoted without the permission of the original poster.

The master copy of this log is maintained in the Darwin-L Archives (rjohara.net/darwin) by Dr. Robert J. O’Hara. The Darwin-L Archives also contain additional information about the Darwin-L discussion group, the complete Today in the Historical Sciences calendar for every month of the year, a collection of recommended readings on the historical sciences, and an account of William Whewell’s concept of “palaetiology.”


--------------------------------------------
DARWIN-L MESSAGE LOG 24: 1-30 -- AUGUST 1995
--------------------------------------------

DARWIN-L
A Network Discussion Group on the
History and Theory of the Historical Sciences

Darwin-L@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu is an international network discussion group on
the history and theory of the historical sciences.  Darwin-L was established
in September 1993 to promote the reintegration of a range of fields all of
which are concerned with reconstructing the past from evidence in the present,
and to encourage communication among academic professionals in these fields.
Darwin-L is not restricted to evolutionary biology nor to the work of Charles
Darwin but instead addresses the entire range of historical sciences from an
interdisciplinary perspective, including evolutionary biology, historical
linguistics, textual transmission and stemmatics, historical geology,
systematics and phylogeny, archeology, paleontology, cosmology, historical
anthropology, historical geography, and related "palaetiological" fields.

This log contains public messages posted to Darwin-L during August 1995.
It has been lightly edited for format: message numbers have been added for ease
of reference, message headers have been trimmed, some irregular lines have been
reformatted, and some administrative messages and personal messages posted to
the group as a whole have been deleted.  No genuine editorial changes have been
made to the content of any of the posts.  This log is provided for personal
reference and research purposes only, and none of the material contained herein
should be published or quoted without the permission of the original poster.
The master copy of this log is maintained in the archives of Darwin-L by
listserv@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu, and is also available on the Darwin-L Web Server
at http://rjohara.uncg.edu.  For instructions on how to retrieve copies of this
and other log files, and for additional information about Darwin-L, send the
e-mail message INFO DARWIN-L to listserv@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu, or connect to
the Darwin-L Web Server.

Darwin-L is administered by Robert J. O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu), Center for
Critical Inquiry in the Liberal Arts and Department of Biology, University of
North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina 27412 U.S.A., and it
is supported by the Center for Critical Inquiry, University of North Carolina
at Greensboro, and the Department of History and the Academic Computing Center,
University of Kansas.

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:1>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Tue Aug  1 00:20:32 1995

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 01:20:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: List owner's monthly greeting
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

Greetings to all Darwin-L subscribers.  On the first of every month I send
out a short note on the status of our group, along with a reminder of basic
Darwin-L Web Server (http://rjohara.uncg.edu).

Darwin-L is an international discussion group for professionals in the
historical sciences.  It is not devoted to any particular discipline, such
as evolutionary biology, but rather endeavors to promote interdisciplinary
comparisons among all the historical sciences.  Darwin-L was established in
September 1993, and we now have over 600 members from more than 30 countries.
I am grateful to all of our members for their continuing interest.

Because Darwin-L has a large membership and is sometimes a high-volume
discussion group it is important for all participants to try to keep their
postings as substantive as possible so that we can maintain a high
"signal-to-noise" ratio.  Personal messages should be sent by private e-mail
rather than to the group as a whole.  Subscribers who feel burdened from
time to time by the volume of their Darwin-L mail may wish to take advantage
of the digest option described below.

Different mail systems work differently, and not all subscribers can see
the e-mail address of the original sender of each message in the message
header (some people only see "Darwin-L" as the source).  It is therefore
very important to include your name and e-mail address at the end of every
message you post so that everyone can identify you and reply privately if
appropriate.  Remember also that in most cases when you type "reply" in
response to a message from Darwin-L your reply is sent to the group as a
whole, rather than to the original sender.

The following are the most frequently used listserv commands that Darwin-L
members may wish to know.  All of these commands should be sent as regular
e-mail messages to the listserv address (listserv@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu),
not to the address of the group as a whole (Darwin-L@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu).
In each case leave the subject line of the message blank and include no
extraneous text, as the command will be read and processed by the listserv
program rather than by a person.  To join the group send the message:

For example: SUBSCRIBE DARWIN-L John Smith

To cancel your subscription send the message:

UNSUBSCRIBE DARWIN-L

If you feel burdened by the volume of mail you receive from Darwin-L you
may instruct the listserv program to deliver mail to you in digest format
(one message per day consisting of the whole day's posts bundled together).

SET DARWIN-L MAIL DIGEST

To change your subscription from digest format back to one-at-a-time
delivery send the message:

SET DARWIN-L MAIL ACK

To temporarily suspend mail delivery (when you go on vacation, for example)
send the message:

SET DARWIN-L MAIL POSTPONE

To resume regular delivery send either the DIGEST or ACK messages above.

For a comprehensive introduction to Darwin-L with notes on our scope and
on network etiquette, and a summary of all available commands, send the
message:

INFO DARWIN-L

To post a public message to the group as a whole simply send it as regular
e-mail to the group's address (Darwin-L@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu).

I thank you all for your continuing interest in Darwin-L and in the
interdisciplinary study of the historical sciences.

Bob O'Hara, Darwin-L list owner

Robert J. O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu)
Center for Critical Inquiry and Department of Biology
100 Foust Building, University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Greensboro, North Carolina 27412 U.S.A.

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:2>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Tue Aug  1 12:31:11 1995

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 13:28:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: August 1 -- Today in the Historical Sciences
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

AUGUST 1 -- TODAY IN THE HISTORICAL SCIENCES

1744: JEAN BAPTISTE PIERRE ANTOINE DE MONET, CHEVALIER DE LAMARCK born
at Bazentin-le-Petit, Picardy, France.  A pioneer of invertebrate
paleontology, Lamarck will come to reject the fixity of species late in
his life and will expound an evolutionary view of nature, first in 1802,
and then more thoroughly in 1809 in his _Philosophie Zoologique_.

Today in the Historical Sciences is a feature of Darwin-L, an international
network discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.
Send the message INFO DARWIN-L to listserv@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu or connect

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:3>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Tue Aug  1 15:38:13 1995

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 16:37:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: Re: Philosophical bent
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

works.  I'm not a Darwin specialist, but one source might be Robert Richard's
book _Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior_
(Univ. Chicago Press, 1987).  Perhaps Dagmar could be more specific in his
request, and maybe others could offer suggestions as well.  Are you looking
for material on, say, ethics, or epistemology, or some other area?

Bob O'Hara
darwin@iris.uncg.edu

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:4>From staddon@psych.duke.edu Tue Aug  1 18:07:46 1995

Date: Tue, 1 Aug 95 19:07:28 EDT
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Philosophical bent

Darwin wrote almost nothing directly philosophical, but much
sophisticated philosophy is implied by his work.  The best source
I know is M. Ghiselin's "The triumph of the Darwinian method"
(1969).

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:5>From RHRSBI@ritvax.isc.rit.edu Tue Aug  1 20:28:29 1995

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 1995 21:13:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: RHRSBI@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: Philosophical bent
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

Darwin certainly tried to rigorously avoid discussions of the religious
implications of his work and all of his books are scientific.  Similarly, there
is little beyond science in his "Collected Papers" edited by Paull Barrett,
although there is his "Moral State of Tahiti" in that volume.  But probably the
best source of his philosophical leanings are in his unpublished notebooks.
Try "Metaphysics, Materialism, and the Evolution of Mind", edited by Barrett
and published by Univ. Chicago Press.  This is a transcription and annotation
of his M and N notebooks, his "old and useless notes about the moral sense and
some metaphysical points", and a few other odds and ends.  The same ground is
also covered by "Darwin on Man" by Howard Gruber with notebook material
transcribed again by Barret.  My copy is published by Dutton, but I think
University of Chicago Press subsequently republished it.

Bob Rothman
Biology Department
Rochester Institute of Technology

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:6>From hineline@helix.ucsd.edu Wed Aug  2 10:29:23 1995

From: Mark Hineline <hineline@helix.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: Philosophical bent
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 95 8:29:19 PDT

"philosophical bent" was a good one, but it could have been more pointed.
The distinction that we today recognize between philosophy and science
was not as firm in Darwin's time as it is for us. By the standards of
academic philosophy today, Darwin was not much of a philosopher.

However, Darwin was interested in meeting the standards of argument and
proof outlined by John Herschel and William Whewell. And -- although I
cannot locate chapter and verse -- I seem to recall that he was stung
by Herschel's dismissal of natural selection as the "law of higglety-
piggelty." One can scarcely imagine a scientist today losing sleep over
the opinion of a philosopher [unless the philosopher had some effect
on funding].

The Origin of Species grapples with two issues that have their roots in
philosophy: essentialism and causality. To the extent that Darwin
reconstructed these issues, he was as much a philosopher as a scientist.
True, he was not a *professional* philosopher, but he was not a
*professional* anything else, either.

Mark Hineline
Department of History
UCSD
La Jolla, CA 92093
hineline@helix.ucsd.edu

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:7>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Wed Aug  2 13:18:35 1995

Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 14:18:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: Assistance requested from teachers of biology and evolution
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

I am starting a research project to survey college and university students'
knowledge and understanding of evolutionary history.  This project was
inspired by the studies geographers have done on "mental maps", the
conceptions of geographical space that all people carry around in their
heads, conceptions derived both from education and from personal experience.
My own project involves having students draw an evolutionary tree of life,
to the best of their ability, on a blank sheet of paper according to some
very simple instructions.  (Geographers often ask students to draw a world
map on a blank sheet of paper in their studies of mental maps.)  This is in
no way a test or graded exercise, and students' names are not requested on
the form; it is simply a means to assess their knowledge of phylogeny.

I am looking for college and university faculty who might be willing to help
with this project by taking about 10 minutes at the beginning of their first
class to let students fill out this form.  While students at any level are
of interest, I'm particularly curious to survey students in introductory
college biology or introductory college evolution courses.  I can supply any
instructors who would like to participate with either a master copy of the
form which they can duplicate themselves, or with a package containing the
number of copies needed.  All assistance will of course be gratefully
acknowledged, and I think most of the participants will find the results
very interesting.

If you are a college or university teacher of biology or evolution and would
and an estimate of the number of students in your class (or just a request
for a master copy of the form to be copied by you).  I will send the survey
off to you right away, with thanks.

Bob O'Hara, Darwin-L list owner

Robert J. O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu; http://rjohara.uncg.edu)
Center for Critical Inquiry in the Liberal Arts and Department of Biology
100 Foust Building, University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Greensboro, North Carolina 27412 U.S.A.

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:8>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Sat Aug  5 00:09:55 1995

Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 01:09:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: August 5 -- Today in the Historical Sciences
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

AUGUST 5 -- TODAY IN THE HISTORICAL SCIENCES

1852: FRANTISEK LADISLAV CELAKOVSKY, Professor of Slavic Philology at
Charles University in Prague, dies.  A collector of Slavic proverbs and
folktales, as well as a linguist and amateur botanist, Celakovsky will
draw one of the first trees of language history.  The diagram will be
published from his lecture notes in 1853, a year after his death.

Today in the Historical Sciences is a feature of Darwin-L, an international
network discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.
Send the message INFO DARWIN-L to listserv@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu or connect

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:9>From RAC7@aol.com Sat Aug  5 10:53:51 1995

Date: Sat, 5 Aug 1995 11:53:50 -0400
From: RAC7@aol.com
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Methods used in historical sciences

I am a high school biology teacher.  I will be teaching a new biology course
this Fall and the text that I will be using stresses the
hypothetico-deductive method as the one "true" approach to doing science.  I
would like to introduce my students to the idea that there are many different
approaches that scientists use.  Can anyone suggest a reference for me that
describes methods used in the historical sciences and how they differ from
the hypothetico-deductive approach?  I may be way out in left field on this.
I don't know.  Please comment if I am.  Also it would be very helpful if
someone could suggest a short essay related to this topic that could be read
by my students.

Thanks

Bob Cooper  <rac7@aol.com>

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:10>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Mon Aug  7 12:58:26 1995

Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 13:58:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: Darwin-L Web Server
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

described below, on the "Network Resources" page of the Darwin-L
Web Server, along with new links to a few other palaetiological web
sites I have come across recently.  All Darwin-L readers are cordially
invited to visit the Darwin-L Web Server (http://rjohara.uncg.edu) if
network sites in the historical sciences, it contains the logs of all
our past discussions on Darwin-L, as well as the "Today in the Historical
Sciences" calendar, and some bibliographies that have been posted to the
group from time to time.

I note also in passing that the ukanaix listserv is being very sluggish
again.  This is a recurring problem, and I regret that I seem to be
powerless to do anything about it at the present.  I hope the situation
will improve soon.

Bob O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu)

--begin forwarded message--------------

History Computerization Project on the Internet

If you visit the History Computerization Project
(at "http://www.history.la.ca.us/history") you will find:

1) Annotated directories of hundreds of historical resources;

2) Historical photos on display; and

3) An online order form to request a free, printed,
History Database tutorial on the use of computer database
management for historical research, writing, and cataloging.

The History Computerization Project is building a history
information network for the exchange of information between
historians, librarians, archivists, museum curators,
preservation groups, and historical societies.  The project
employs the History Database program, running on IBM PC
compatible computers.  The program is used for both
cataloging and research with all types of historical
materials, including photographs, museum objects, archives,
books, journals, and oral history interviews.  The course
textbook, Database Design: Applications of Library
Cataloging Techniques, by David L. Clark, is published
by the TAB division of McGraw-Hill.

For information contact:
History Computerization Project
E-Mail: history@history.la.ca.us

--end forwarded message----------------

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:11>From ad201@freenet.carleton.ca Tue Aug  8 09:19:41 1995

Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 10:17:31 -0400
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Method in historical sciences

Bob Cooper <rac7@aol.com>  wrote recently:

\I will be teaching a new biology course this Fall and the text that I will
\be using stresses the hypothetico-deductive method as the one "true"
\approach to doing science.  I would like to introduce my students to the
\idea that there are many different approaches that scientists use.  Can
\anyone suggest a reference for me that describes methods used in the
\historical sciences and how they differ from the hypothetico-deductive
\approach?

So far as hypo-ded method requires experimental verification, it is
obviously inappropriate for nonexperimental sciences, e.g. palaeontology,
cosmology, much of geology etc., which does not invalidate them.

Specifically, the Double Helix story seems to describe a
different but equally legitimate approach, viz. model-building:  in this
case, identifying the parts and looking for a spatial geography that
worked.  Crick's later work on the genetic code (see handy summary in
appendix to his autobiography) looks to me like the same sort of
model-building.  Both required hypotheses, as all interesting science
does, but these hypotheses could not be tested by experiment in Newtonian
terms.

(Cooper:  write directly if you need more detail.  This was a theme in an
introductory STS course I devised in 1990, which used chaps 1, 2, 5 of
Casti's Paradigms Lost as a textbook but in general theme differed
substantially from Casti who at that date seemed too determinist.
Model-building seems to me a practically successful mean between Baconian
induction and mechanistic hypo-ded, and suitable for some but not all
scientific subject-matter.  It answers the question what the researcher
can do when addressing a Major Problem for which no Crucial
Experiment can be designed.)

--
|          Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Rd., Carlsbad         |
|        Springs, Ont., Canada K0A 1K0; tel: (613) 822-0734       |
|  "What I've always liked about science is its independence from |
|  authority"--Ontario Science Centre (name on file) 10 July 1981 |

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:12>From mdj@gac.edu Tue Aug  8 10:22:51 1995

Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 10:22:47 -0500
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
From: mdj@gac.edu (Mark D. Johnson)
Subject: Comparative planetology

Gustavus Adolphus College is holding  a conference on the solar system in
the next few years. I am looking for someone that can speak to the
historical aspects of solar-system development.

I recall an interesting article inScience in the last couple of years that
discussed the idea of 'comparative planetology' and mentioned how
complexity and diversity reigns in planetary composition and evolution.

Any good names? Any good articles?

Thank you

Mark

Mark D. Johnson
Department of Geology, Gustavus Adolphus College
800 W. College, St. Peter, MN 56082
mdj@gac.edu  (507) 933-7442

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:13>From jsl@rockvax.rockefeller.edu Tue Aug  8 10:26:49 1995

To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Model Building vs. experiment in scientific/historical method
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 1995 11:31:10 EDT
From: Joshua Lederberg <jsl@rockvax.rockefeller.edu>

<<<<
Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Rd., Carlsbad just wrote:

different but equally legitimate approach, viz. model-building:  in this
case, identifying the parts and looking for a spatial geography that
worked.  (in contrast to hypothetico-deductive experiment...)
>>>>

I don't see a big difference.  Every experiment entails a process
model, if not a structural one.

The common element is that some objects (photographic records,
historical papers, biological specimens) are put into an analyzer
(X-ray diffraction, telescope, record sifter), and the output matched
against expectations of one's model/hypothesis.  If the matches are
ambiguous, one is usually guided where to look for other data that
may allow critical disambiguation.

At one end of the spectrum, the analyzer or sifter is not systematic,
but intuitive; and it may be correspondingly less clear what
alternative hypotheses/models were still consistent with the available
records/data.  In such circumstances the data may be so transparent
that one can argue whether any trial hypotheses had to be abduced
in order to single out the chosen assertion.  My own experience in
life as well as in science is that we would do well to make a
systematic parsing of alternatives even in such circumstances.  Cf:
R. Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics.
Princeton Univ Press  1976

--------

Prof. Joshua Lederberg
The Rockefeller University
1230 York Avenue
New York, NY   10021-6399

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:14>From PRSDRHS@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU Tue Aug  8 10:37:19 1995

Date: Tue, 08 Aug 1995 10:36 -0600 (CST)
From: PRSDRHS@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU
Subject: Re: Methods used in historical sciences
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

Bob Cooper wrote:

> I am a high school biology teacher.  I will be teaching a new biology course
> this Fall and the text that I will be using stresses the
> hypothetico-deductive method as the one "true" approach to doing science.  I
> would like to introduce my students to the idea that there are many different
> approaches that scientists use.  ...

historical sciences, but do you know the work of Joseph Jackson Schwab
(1909-1988)?  Joseph Schwab was a very great teacher who especially
addressed the diversity of methods used in biological science.  There is
a memorial to him in _Remembering the University of Chicago_, ed. Edward
A. Shils (Chicago: 1991) 452-68.

You might look at his own works, among them:

Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, _Biology teachers' handbook_ (NY:
Wiley, 1963).

_Science curriculm, and liberal education: selected essays_, ed. Ian
Westbury & Neil J. Wilkof (Chicago: 1978).

In his day Schwab taught wonderful and tough discussion courses using
original, classic biology research texts to bring out the point that
there was no "one true" method of doing science.

Dick Schmitt

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:15>From bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au Tue Aug  8 23:36:05 1995

Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 12:35:40 +0800 (WST)
From: Hugo Bouckaert <bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au>
To: Darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Darwin, Marx and Freud

I have been asked to give a series of lectures on the relationship between
Darwin (and Darwinism) and political doctrines, in particular Marxism, and
another series on the relationship between Darwin and psychology, dealing
with Skinner, Lorenz and also Freud.

In regards to the "political" lectures, there is a lot of material on
social Darwinism, liberalism and eugenics, but it seems harder to find
much on the relationship Darwinism - Marxism. Does anybody have some
ideas in regards to this relationship, or, alternatively, can anybody
give me one or more good references?

Similarly, the relationship between Darwinism and Skinner's ideas is
rather straightforward. But what about Darwinism and Freudian psychology?
Anybody with ideas onthis subject, or again, one or more references? I
would be most grateful.

Hugo Bouckaert

bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:16>From carey@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu Wed Aug  9 09:34:10 1995

Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 10:42:22 -0500
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
From: carey@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Arlen D. Carey)
Subject: Re: DARWIN, MARX, and FREUD

Here are a couple of starters:
Darwin and Marx:  _Human Nature and Biocultural Evolution_, Joseph
Lopreato, 1984.  _In Search of Human Nature:  The Decline and Revival of
Darwinism in American Social Thought_, Carl N. Deglar, 1991.

Darwin and Freud:  _Freud, Biologist of the Mind_, Frank Sulloway, 1994(?)
(I'm guessing on this one--haven't gotten to it yet).  You also may want
to check into the other representatives of the rapidly growing literature
on "evolutionary psycholgy"  (check the "human behavior and evolution
society" web page:  "http://beauty.mcl.ucsb.edu:/cep/hbestie.html")

Arlen D. Carey
carey@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Department of Sociology                   office phone:  407/823-2240
& Anthropology                           office fax:  407/823-3026
Univ. of Central Florida                    home phone:  407/644-4934
Orlando Fl, 32816-1360                        home fax:  407/644-4962

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:17>From elanier@crl.nmsu.edu Wed Aug  9 12:26:23 1995

Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 11:26:21 -0700
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
From: elanier@crl.nmsu.edu (Ellery Lanier)
Subject: somatoyping

Just received Ed Miller's paper re:hormonal transfer from one fetus to another.
Thank you. Ed. According to my research the hormonal transfer should show
up in quantifiable dimensions on the body.Just what I was looking for! Have
not had a chance to look at the paper yet but am writing to tell members to
look at Aug 7, 95 issue of The New Yorker, pg 45 Double Mystery by Lawrence
Wright.
Among other twin studies,it reports on Neubauer"s research on twin
behavior. Neubauers book Nature's Thumbprint was published around five
years ago.
Most of the material in the Wright article is well known in our circles but one
item was new to me and most fascinating, the concept of "Vanishing Twins".
An estimate is given that up to fifteen per cent of us are only the big
half and somehow we know it.The possible effects on personality are
profound.
As you may know, my field is somatotyping. I have been called an
'astrologer" for claiming a relationship between body type and temperament.
A correspondent friend in Europe was threatened with loss of his medical
license if he persisted in such research. The concept was erroneously
identified with the Nazi experiments. Now the concept has become respectable.
Discussion of the Vanishing Twin phenomenon would be appreciated.

Ellery        elanier@crl.nmsu.edu

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:18>From bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au Wed Aug  9 22:47:49 1995

Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 11:47:23 +0800 (WST)
From: Hugo Bouckaert <bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au>
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

Not even 24 hours have passed since I put out an inquiry about the
relationship Darwin - Freud and Darwin - Marx and I got this fabulous
response! Your mail has been very useful and is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Hugo Bouckaert

Bouckaer@central.murdoch.edu.au

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:19>From t20mxs1@corn.cso.niu.edu Wed Aug  9 23:40:43 1995

Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 23:40:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Salovesh <t20mxs1@corn.cso.niu.edu>
Subject: Joseph J. Schwab and teaching
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

Dick Schmitt, answering Bob Cooper's request for help in teaching his
high school biology students that there are many different approaches
used by scientists, recommends looking for the works of the late Joseph
Jackson Schwab.

Since I took not one, but two year-long courses (9 semester hours each)
from Joe Schwab back in the late 1940's, I have to comment.  The courses
were Natural Science 2 and Natural Science 3, then brand new courses
given only to students who had entered the U of Chicago before they
finished high school.  That means that the oldest students in the courses
may have been as old as 18.  You'll see the relevance of that fact below.

People who took these courses from Joe Schwab consistently scored higher
(on average) on the general comprehensive exams over the course than those
who took them from anybody else, and there were some pretty good
biologists who taught the other sections of the course.  That was true for
any course Joe taught, up to and including the philosophy courses he took
on from time to time. In that sense he must have been a great teacher.

The way he got those results, however, would only have worked with the
learning in self-defense.  And I do mean bullied: somebody would break
into tears in his classes just about every week.

For example, ask me anytime what Clark Hull had to say in his classic
"The significance of the goal response in maze rats" and I'll tell you,
almost fifty years after Joe made sure I knew.  How did he do that?

His eagle eye had an uncanny way of picking up the student who was least
prepared and picking on him.  He started class on the day we were to
consider Hull's article by pointing to me and asking me to summarize the
article.  I was cool.  I was smart.  I was unprepared.  (And I was 16 or
17 and thought myself sophisticated.)  So I said "I'm sorry, Mr. Schwab,
I haven't read the article yet."

"What?  How dare you come into MY class without reading the assignment!
Get out!  Leave this room now, go somewhere and read the article, and
don't come back until next class!!"

So I picked up my stuff and headed for the door.  When I got to the
aisle, he stopped me and said: "Just a minute.  If you'll venture a guess
about what you think the article might be about on the basis of its title
alone, you can stay."

Cool me.  I said: "I'm sorry, Mr. Schwab, there's no sense in bandying
words with you.  I haven't read the article and I don't know what it says
and there's no sense in guessing just to have you show I'm wrong."  And I
continued out the door.

Joe then spent the rest of the hour using my behavior as a demonstration
of Hull's point: the closer I got to the door, the less chance there was
to stop me from getting through it.  The "goal response in maze rats"
that Hull describes is that rats go faster and faster the nearer they get
to the cheese at the end of the maze.

OK, I learned the lesson for the day.  My classmates, breathing a sigh of
"There, but for the grace of God, go I" also learned it, and they got it
reinforced when they told me about the rest of that day's class.

He taught with a very heavy touch of sadism.  I don't think he could have
gotten away with it if he'd tried the same methods with one of the
classes full of returned WW II GI's.  And, as I told him many times over
the years that followed (since I kept running across him around the
campus or in the neighborhood), I still think his way of teaching was
unforgiveable.  As I grew up, it was fun to continue THAT discussion.
His classes taught a lot of material very thoroughly at the cost of real
damage to the psyche of at least some of his students.  I appreciate him
and what he taught me, but I don't forgive the collateral damage.

--  mike salovesh                    <salovesh@niu.edu>
department of anthropology
northern illinois university
de kalb, illinois  60115

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:20>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Thu Aug 10 15:18:07 1995

Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 16:17:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: Library of Congress subject headings
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

Last year for a course I put together a compilation of the Library of
Congress subject headings for the various historical sciences.  The students
found it helpful, and since there have been a few messages recently about
teaching in the historical sciences I thought I would post the list here.
I think it is also an interesting commentary on the structure and
relationships of the historical sciences, at least as they are seen by the
catalogers at the Library of Congress.  It would be interesting to have
information on when each of these classes was first introduced; some are
obviously recent (like "Cladistic analysis" which can't have been around
for many years), while there must be other headings that have disappeared.
Maybe I could make it a special project to have "Palaetiology" created
as an LC subject heading.  ;-)

I have posted a longer version of this list on the Darwin-L Web Server
(http://rjohara.uncg.edu) in the Files directory for anyone who would
like to browse it further.

Bob O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS SUBJECT HEADINGS RELATING TO THE HISTORICAL SCIENCES.
Taken from: Library of Congress Subject Headings, 15th edition (1992),
Washington, D.C.: Cataloging Distribution Service, Library of Congress.
Compiled by Robert J. O'Hara; a longer version is available on the Darwin-L
Web Server (http://rjohara.uncg.edu) in the Files directory.

LISTED ALPHABETICALLY:

Anthropology, Prehistoric {no special call number}

Antiquarians {no special call number}

Archaeology [CC (general)] [GN700-GN890 (prehistoric antiquity)]

Here and with local subdivision are entered works on the discipline of
archaeology.  Works on the antiquities of particular regions, countries,
cities, etc. are entered under the name of the place subdivided by
Antiquities.

Auxiliary sciences of history [C] {major class; includes many others}

Biology--Classification [QH83] {not all historical}

Botany--Classification [QK91-QK95] {not all historical}

Branching processes {not all historical; no special call number}

Chronology [CE]

Chronology, Historical [D11]

Chronology, Historical--Charts, diagrams, etc. [D11-D11.5]

Comparative linguistics [P123]

Here are entered works which compare languages or groups of languages
for the specific purpose of determining their common origin, or discuss
the method of comparison, as represented by the 19th century comparative
philology and its subsequent developments.  Works which compare or
contrast two or more languages with the aim of finding principles which
can be applied to practical problems in language teaching and translation
are entered under the heading Contrastive linguistics.

Cosmology [QB980-QB991 (astronomy)]

Cosmogony [QB980-QB991 (astronomy)] [QE506 (geology)]

Criticism, Textual [P47] [PA47]

Here are entered works on the investigation of literary
documents to determine their origin, history, or original form.

Diplomatics [CD1-CD724]

Evolution (Biology) [QH359-QH425]

Genealogy [CS]

Geological time [QE508]

Geology [QE]  {major class; includes many others}

Geology--History [QE11-QE13]

Geology, Stratigraphic [QE640-QE699]

Historical geography [G141 (general)]

Historical geology [QE 28.3]

Historical jurisprudence [K325]

Historical lexicology [P326]

Historical linguistics [P123]

Historicism [D16.9]

Historiography [D13-D15]

History--Methodology [D16]

History--Philosophy [D16.7-D16.9]

Inscriptions [CN]

Linguistic paleontology [P35]

Paleobiogeography [QE721.2.P24]

Paleobotany [QE901-QE996.5]

Paleoclimatology [QC884-QC884.2]

Paleoecology [QE720]

Paleogeography [QE501.4.P3]

Paleoceanography [QE39.5.P25]

Paleontology [QE701-QE996.5]

Paleography [Z105-Z115.5]

Phylogeny [QH367.5]

Radioactive dating [QC798.D3 (physics)] [QE508 (geology)]

Reconstruction (Linguistics) [P143.2]

Stratigraphic correlation [QE652.5-QE652.55]

Transmission of texts {no special call number}

Zoology--Classification [QL351-QL352] {not all historical}

LISTED BY CALL NUMBER:

[C] Auxiliary sciences of history {major class; includes many others}

[CC (general)] Archaeology

[CD1-CD724] Diplomatics

[CE] Chronology

[CN] Inscriptions

[CS] Genealogy

[D11-D11.5] Chronology, Historical--Charts, diagrams, etc.

[D11] Chronology, Historical

[D13-D15] Historiography

[D16] History--Methodology

[D16.7-D16.9] History--Philosophy

[D16.9] Historicism

[G141 (general)] Historical geography

[GN700-GN890 (prehistoric antiquity)] Archaeology

[K325] Historical jurisprudence

[P35] Linguistic paleontology

[P47] Criticism, Textual

[P123] Comparative linguistics

[P123] Historical linguistics

[P143.2] Reconstruction (Linguistics)

[P326] Historical lexicology

[PA47] Criticism, Textual

[QB980-QB991 (astronomy)] Cosmogony

[QB980-QB991 (astronomy)] Cosmology

[QC884-QC884.2] Paleoclimatology

[QE 28.3] Historical geology

[QE11-QE13] Geology--History

[QE39.5.P25] Paleoceanography

[QE501.4.P3] Paleogeography

[QE506 (geology)] Cosmogony

[QE508] Geological time

[QE640-QE699] Geology, Stratigraphic

[QE652.5-QE652.55] Stratigraphic correlation

[QE701-QE996.5] Paleontology

[QE720] Paleoecology

[QE721.2.P24] Paleobiogeography

[QE901-QE996.5] Paleobotany

[QE] Geology {major class; includes many others}

[QH83] Biology--Classification {not all historical}

[QH359-QH425] Evolution (Biology)

[QH367.5] Phylogeny

[QK91-QK95] Botany--Classification {not all historical}

[QL351-QL352] Zoology--Classification {not all historical}

[Z105-Z115.5] Paleography

---------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:21>From DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu Thu Aug 10 16:55:35 1995

Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 17:55:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: DARWIN@iris.uncg.edu
Subject: New selection book
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Organization: University of NC at Greensboro

Darwin-L member Gary Cziko recently sent me this notice of his new
book with the request that I forward it to the group.  I think it will
be of interest to a number of people on the list.

Bob O'Hara (darwin@iris.uncg.edu)

--begin forwarded message--------------

WITHOUT MIRACLES
Universal Selection Theory and the Second Darwinian Revolution

Gary Cziko

"...it is a truly admirable work, and should prove extremely
valuable. There is really nothing to compete with it for its broad
scope and lively, easy style."
-- John Ziman, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University
of Bristol, and Fellow of the Royal Society.

"The fish's streamlined shape reveals functional knowledge of the physical
properties of water.... The deadly effectiveness of the cobra's venom shows
useful knowledge of the physiology of its prey.... Indeed, knowledge itself
may be broadly conceived as the fit of some aspect of an organism to some
aspect of its environment, whether it be the fit of the butterfly's long
siphon of a mouth to the flowers from which it feeds or the fit of the
astrophysicist's theories to the structure of the universe. ... But how did
such remarkable instances of fit arise? How did the animate world obtain its
impressive knowledge of its surroundings? And how do organisms continue to
acquire knowledge and thereby increase their fit during their lifetimes?"

In this sweeping account of the emergence of fit, Gary Cziko integrates
numerous scientific disciplines within the perspective of a universal
selection theory that attempts to account for all cases of fit involving
living organisms, including those that might appear miraculous. Cziko's bold
assertion is that all novel forms of adapted complexity -- whether
single-celled organisms or scientific theories -- emerge from an
evolutionary process involving cumulative blind variation and selection.

_Without Miracles_ describes many remarkable examples of the fit of various
structures, behaviors, and products of living organisms to their
environments in a broad synthesis of humankind's attempt to understand the
emergence of complex, adapted entities. These explanations range from the
providential accounts of the early philosophers and "natural theologians,"
through instructionist theories of the type proposed by Lamarck, to an
ongoing "second Darwinian revolution" in which natural and artificial
selection are being applied to many fields of science to both explain the
emergence of naturally occurring adapted complexity and to facilitate the
design of useful products ranging from microbes to computer programs.

The evolution of explanations of fit from providential through
instructionist to selectionist theories, Cziko argues, has occurred
repeatedly in many different fields of knowledge along with a growing
realization that the Darwinian mechanism of cumulative blind variation and
selection is the only tenable nonmiraculous explanation for the emergence of
any kind of functional complexity.

Cziko applies this provocative selectionist thesis to a stunning range of
domains including biology, immunology, neuroscience, ethology, psychology,
anthropology, philosophy, education, linguistics, and computer science. The
result is an up-to-date, clearly summarized collection of selectionist
arguments that shows how our knowledge of the emergence of fit has itself
evolved and continues to do so.

August 1995
ISBN 0-262-03232-5
400 pp.
\$30.00

http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/people/gac/without_miracles/

--end forwarded message----------------

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:22>From proach@darkwing.uoregon.edu Fri Aug 11 06:12:12 1995

Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 04:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul David Roach <proach@darkwing.uoregon.edu>
To: ccdarwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Darwin, Marx, and Skinner

This is my first reply to this list, hope I make no faux pas. Also, my
e-mail software is tossing in and removing symbols and letters at will; please
decode as needed. This is a very diversely regarded set of ideas on their
own; combining them may at least weed out some of the useless, which, as
my dad told me, AT LEAST half the job of science.
This is a bit long, but its a BIG question.
A)- FROM BARKOW, COSMIDES, AND TOOBY, 1992. THE ADAPTED MIND.
The Standard Social Science Model (sssm), has at its heart:
1) The principle known as *the psychic unity of humankind* This is supported by
strong empirical support -babies are extremely similar; Gray' Anatomy
works for all humans, regardless of race, etc. Also, the bulk of variaton
is overwhelming inter-individual, and within-populations, and *not*
between races.
2) Adults differ profoundly in their be{avioral and mental organization.
3) The apparent dirth of innate behavior in human infants (as seen by sssm){
means that the adult mental organization is absent from infants, and they
must aquire it from some source outside themselvesin the course of
development.
4) Obviously -the source is the environment, namely the members of the
local group, i.e. -the mental organization is present in the social world
through public representations. This view is often supported by
deprivation thought experiences, i.e. children raised in closets. But a
plant will not grow in darkness either. Like humans it has mechanisms
(innate and specific) that respond to stimulates.
5) "The individual is the creation of the social world" (Geertz,1973)
"Social facts can only be explained by social facts" -Durkheim (I think
this is how he said it). Thus, the sssm, largely, believe that,
" the cultural and social elements that mold the individual PRECEDE (added)
the individual and are external to the individual". Culture often
referred to as extresomatic, or extragenetic -to remove it further from
biology.
OK, ONTO THE SUBJECT ! Much taken from B.,C.& T. + Wilson('78)& Trivers('85)
B)-
1) Complex human organization, like marxism, is seen by the sssm as
some set of emergent processes, created at the group level. Culture being
a thing *sui generis* which is only understood by looking at the whole
banana. For most *anthropologists* today, even such emotions as sexual
jealousy and parental love are social products! (Find an ethnography that
claims no sexual jealousy in a group, and you've got half an ethnography,
at best -see Freeman on Mead and Samoa (1983).
Marxism, being a social science, or study, theory -whatever, saw human
nature as an empty vessel, waiting to be filled by social processes. It
is primarily an economic exercise, that being the heart of Marxism, but
it relied on the belief that people could be molded in nearly any way.
Including, without religion, greed, ambition, jealousy, or desire for
material goods. Life dedicated to the group, but now a very big,
impersonal group -thus the propoganda to make everybody feel included,
and important. Though the nuerosciences were making it known that the
mind was complex, and not all the *tabula rasa* sssm changed nothing
important. *Tabula rasa* was replaced by *blank cognitive procedures*.
Marxism was not helped certainly (if not destroyed by)the strong amount
of evidence that biologists and others have, especially in the last
decade or two, that -low and behold: Natural selection does not shape
behavior for the benifit of the group or the species, but for *selfish*
reasons: Its own body, and its genes (Dawkins, 1976,1982; Williams,1966 -
the year of my first breath, and the beginning of competition with my
parents, since I represented only half their genes -I wanted more than
they were selected to give me. -For more on this great topic, see Trivers
('74) -Prolonged nursing is the classic form of this: Child begs to
continue, but mom *knows* its time to stop that fertility-decreasing
practice, and put here energy elswhere. The weened child is put at some
risk, but that risk is only 1/2 to the mother since, again, she only
share 1/2 of her genes with her child. Thus, thier respective
risk-assessments are quite different.
By the way, a question that nearly always arises when I discuss this with
someone from an sssm background is: If we're basicaly selfish, why do
people risk their lives for others? -Throwing oneself on a grenade for
example. Well, We've been social animals for how long? Of that time, how
long have we been in nearly constant contact with huge groups of
strangers? -Not long. I would venture to say that 99% of our time of
behavioral evolution has occured in small groups, 10-40 -most quite
closely related. If you die to save three of your kids, plus two sisters
just coming into reproductive age, you've done quite a service to your
genetic health. Especially if there was no way for you to escape, and go
find another mate, etc.

2) In the sssm, psychology is the study of socialization, and the
mechanisms they call "capacity for culture". The central concept being
learning. These mechanisms, to be accepted by the sssm, must be
general-purpose, or as it is now called by evolutionary theorists:
domain-general.
Freud himself was one of the firstin his time who went beyond proximate
explanations and tried to understand the origins and functions of mental
traits. The tenacity of his workmay result from his attempt to explain
the adaptive significance of mental phenomenon.  Obstacles in his way
were several. Freud was overtly Lamarkian, and believed that "ontogeny
recapitulates phylogeny", and he was a group selectionist. He did,
however, recognized the central importance of reproduction to mental life.
A weakness though was his theory of penis-envy/ and boyhood fear of
castration by father for sexual longings for mom. This just holds no water
at all in a modern Darwinian perspective.

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:23>From rmontero@chasque.apc.org Sat Aug 12 04:06:36 1995

Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 23:29:21 -0300
From: Maria Florencia Montero <rmontero@chasque.apc.org>
To: Darwin-L@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re DARWIN-MARX

Ref. Darwin-Marx

I have one of the most interesting books I ever read about the
relationship between Darwin and Marx, or better marxism.
Unfortunately for you, my book is in Spanish, as follows:

E.A. Vieselov - El Darvinismo - Ediciones Pueblos Unidos,
Montevideo, Uruguay. 1964. 525 pp.

This is a direct translation of the 3rd. Russian Edition.
It seems that Prof. Elpidifor Alexeievich Vieselov published
at least 3 editions of his book, 1955, 1957 and 1959, all in
of the book, or if it was published in English.
The book is a rare pearl, a masterpiece of dialectics that
shows how a scientific idea can be distorted to serve
political interests, directly from de coldest part of the Cold
War and from the heart of the Stalinism of the 1950'.
Lots of references to I.V. Michurin, whom
is reputed to be the "Father of the Soviet Creative
Darwinism".
Best regards,

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:24>From pjhughes@islandnet.com Sun Aug 13 19:45:34 1995

Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 17:42:48 -0700
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
From: pjhughes@islandnet.com (Phil Hughes)
Subject: The Snark Hunter's Page

I have placed a simple home page on my server. It contains no graphics but
does have a number of links, some of which may prove useful to other members
of this list who are interested in the historical sciences. The URL is in
the signature below.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Telson Spur: A Way Station for Snark Hunters
(http://www.islandnet.com/~pjhughes/homepage.html)
Philip Jaffray Hughes (Phil Hughes)
Phone: (604)656-8158  Fax: (604)656-2281
E-Mail: pjhughes@islandnet.com (pjhughes@island.amtsgi.bc.ca)
"We're all stuck here for a while. Let's try to work it out."
- Rodney King, 1 May 1992

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:25>From maisel@SDSC.EDU Tue Aug 15 10:54:31 1995

Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 08:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Merry Maisel <maisel@SDSC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Library of Congress subject headings
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

I think Robert O'Hara's suggestion that the LC headings be
amplified to include Palaetiology is very far from a smile
and wink suggestion, to be marked ;^)

It would be an extremely helpful suggestion, and I think it
would be worth identifying those in the librarial community
who might be able to flesh it out and do something about it.

What is happening on DARWIN is, to my mind, emblematic of a
process now going on in the sciences, a revisioning and
reevaluation of the weights and interconnections and
potentials of all fields.  I attribute this to the effects
of a single tool--the computer--upon its users, but it may
be "in the air," as historians say when they can't point to
just one source of changes.  The interdisciplinarity of
DARWIN is matched by the interdisciplinary research going
on everywhere and the creation of enormous numbers of ad hoc
committees to review subjects not recognized in Curricula,
all the "X Studies" that live side by side now with the
Ur Disciplines, and numerous other developments of this kind.

As Bob would say, the Intellectual Tree is being re-drawn.
Adding a category to the LC classification would be a small
move in keeping with all the rest.

I'd be for it.

Merry Maisel
maisel@sdsc.edu

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:26>From PKUEHNLE@philosophie.uni-bielefeld.de Wed Aug 16 01:41:11 1995

From: "Peter Kuehnlein" <PKUEHNLE@philosophie.uni-bielefeld.de>
Organization:  Uni-Bielefeld; Philosophie
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 08:21:37 GMT+0100
Subject: Re: Darwin, Marx, and Freud

> But what about Darwinism and Freudian psychology?
> Anybody with ideas onthis subject, or again, one or more references? I
> would be most grateful.

I don't know if I do remember right; but I think that some parts of
one of Patricia Kitcher's latest books, _Freud's Dream: A Complete
Interdisciplinary Science of Mind_, are concerned with this issue.
Wether or not, this book is worth reading if (but not only if) you are
interested in Freudian psychology and the relationship between Freuds

Peter Kuehnlein
Dept. of Philosophy
Univ. of Bielefeld
pkuehnle@philosophie.uni-bielefeld.de

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:27>From jmiller@america.com Wed Aug 16 16:00:57 1995

Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 16:59:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: J MIller <jmiller@america.com>
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Darwin, Marx, and Skinner

Paul David Roach <proach@darkwing.uoregon.edu> wrote:

> [...]
> By the way, a question that nearly always arises when I discuss this with
> someone from an sssm background is: If we're basicaly selfish, why do
> people risk their lives for others? -Throwing oneself on a grenade for
> example. Well, We've been social animals for how long? Of that time, how
> long have we been in nearly constant contact with huge groups of
> strangers? -Not long. I would venture to say that 99% of our time of
> behavioral evolution has occured in small groups, 10-40 -most quite
> closely related. If you die to save three of your kids, plus two sisters
> just coming into reproductive age, you've done quite a service to your
> genetic health. Especially if there was no way for you to escape, and go
> find another mate, etc.

I am compelled to ask a slightly different question: Why do people risk
their lives to save non-human objects? Why would anyone risk his/her life
to save, say, a poodle from a burning building - an animal that didn't
even exist in the EEA (environment of evolutionary adaptation)? I am not
asking this facetiously; I have always been troubled by the unwillingness
of neo-Darwinism to allow any room for human capacity to invent values.
On the other hand, if it is allowed that humans are capable of acting quite
contrary to their evolutionary design, can neo-Darwinism provide a clear
line at which inclusive fitness stops and "artificial" concerns begin?

J.Miller

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:28>From p_stevens@nocmsmgw.harvard.edu Thu Aug 17 12:14:17 1995

Date: 17 Aug 1995 13:11:30 -0400
From: "p stevens" <p_stevens@nocmsmgw.harvard.edu>
Subject: knowledge of Darwin
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu

A few weeks ago there was discussion about what people in different countries
were taught about evolution, etc.  The following exchange that I overheard
about a month ago might be of interest (I wish I could give some idea of the
accents involved).

Protagonists: Man replacing a roof at Down House, where Darwin lived most his
life; custodian of Down House.

Custodian:  [Brief explanation about evolution, etc.]

Roofer:  Was he American?

Peter Stevens.

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:29>From rog@cns.brown.edu Fri Aug 18 09:04:54 1995

From: rog@cns.brown.edu (Roger B. Blumberg)
Subject: historical approaches to biology
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 09:53:31 -0400 (EDT)

In the mid-80s I was involved with a science & mathematics course at
Columbia that used original science papers as the basis for study. The
biology unit focused on the discovery of the structure of DNA, from
Mendel's pea plant paper, through the 1953 papers by Watson & Crick.
(Some information about the course, called "Theory and Practice of
Science", is available at MendelWeb
http://www.netspace.org/MendelWeb/)

I received the attached mail from someone looking for other biology
courses with a historical (primary text) emphasis, and thought people
on this list might know of just such offerings. As Prof. Lederman is not
on this list, please write to her directly (or copy her on anything
you send to darwin-l).

Thanks,

Roger

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Roger B. Blumberg
Institute for Brain & Neural Systems
Department of Physics, Brown University
rog@cns.brown.edu      401-863-3920
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

_______________________________________________________________________________

<24:30>From lessinge@turing.unicamp.br Fri Aug 18 12:08:33 1995

Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 13:38:08 -0500
From: lessinge@turing.unicamp.br
To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Darwin, Marx, and Skinner

>I am compelled to ask a slightly different question: Why do people risk
>their lives to save non-human objects? Why would anyone risk his/her life
>to save, say, a poodle from a burning building - an animal that didn't
>even exist in the EEA (environment of evolutionary adaptation)? I am not
>asking this facetiously; I have always been troubled by the unwillingness
>of neo-Darwinism to allow any room for human capacity to invent values.
>On the other hand, if it is allowed that humans are capable of acting quite
>contrary to their evolutionary design, can neo-Darwinism provide a clear
>line at which inclusive fitness stops and "artificial" concerns begin?
>
>J.Miller

I'm a little bit afraid about using Darwinism concepts to understand
human attitudes in our society. People could confuse the biological
animal that we are with the cultural one. This biological animal has
evolved time enough and has an evolutionary history from which we can
identify especific behaviors and try to understand them.
But our modern,"artificial" and urban civilization is too young to being
asked about "Why do people risk their lives to save non-human objects?"
as if this was an atribute from human evolutionary history. I think that
those values shoud be discused in an anthopology perspective. I believe
that social humans are quite different from social bees. We must pay attention
to not simplify or adapt biological theories to our Ocidental culture.
A.Lessinger lessinge@turing.unicamp.br

_______________________________________________________________________________
Darwin-L Message Log 24: 1-30 -- August 1995                                End