rjohara.net |
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 commands. For additional information about the group please visit the new 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: SUBSCRIBE DARWIN-L <Your Name> 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). To receive your mail in digest format send the message: 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 to the Darwin-L Web Server (http://rjohara.uncg.edu) for more information. _______________________________________________________________________________ <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 Dagmar Parer (dagmarp@aa.gov.au) asks about Charles Darwin's philosophical 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 From: staddon@psych.duke.edu (John Staddon) 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). John Staddon _______________________________________________________________________________ <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 Bob O'Hara's reply to Dagmar Parer's question about Darwin's purported "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 like to participate, please send me by email your name and postal address, 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 to the Darwin-L Web Server (http://rjohara.uncg.edu) for more information. _______________________________________________________________________________ <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 I have just added a link to the History Computerization Project, 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 they have not done so already -- in addition to links to a variety of 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 Home Page: http://www.history.la.ca.us/history E-Mail: history@history.la.ca.us Address: 24851 Piuma Road, Malibu, CA 90265-3036 USA --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 From: ad201@freenet.carleton.ca (Donald Phillipson) 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 Reply-to: (J. Lederberg)lederberg@rockvax.rockefeller.edu -------- 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. ... This does not address your specific question about methods used in the 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 students he had: insecure mid-adolescents who could be bullied into 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} Cladistic analysis [QH83 (Biology--Classification)] 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 [QC798.D3 (physics)] Radioactive dating [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 (geology)] Radioactive dating [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)] Cladistic analysis [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. A Bradford Book August 1995 ISBN 0-262-03232-5 400 pp. $30.00 For table of contents and sample chapters see 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 Moscow. I dont have more information about the original name 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) Sidney, British Columbia, Canada 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 adventure and science(s). 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. Roofer: Who was this Darwin fellow? 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