tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post8413035207394641881..comments2023-10-10T08:02:18.073-04:00Comments on Rationally Speaking: Willfully misquotedUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-42153843314650328342012-04-18T01:56:23.022-04:002012-04-18T01:56:23.022-04:00Consciousness (i.e. subjective awareness) is not a...Consciousness (i.e. subjective awareness) is not an illusion. It's axiomatic (i.e. self-evident). Any attempt to deny it presupposes it. That being said, materialists consider "free will" to be purely illusory. Why? Because materialists consider mental phenomena to be epiphenomenal and therefore causally inert. And since our entire mental life is predicated on a belief in free will, then the materialist must deem our entire mental life to be illusory.Alastair F. Paisleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15732723685886383829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-26364997512272177432012-04-12T07:51:18.165-04:002012-04-12T07:51:18.165-04:00Johanna,
while Gould (and Eldredge) certainly in...Johanna, <br /><br />while Gould (and Eldredge) certainly initially exaggerated the import of puncteq, in plenty of subsequent publications they made it clear that it was compatible with the Modern Synthesis. It is also true, however, that it raises its own issues that are not reducible to standard popgen, such as the possibility of species selection.<br /><br />As for his other professional contributions, Ontogeny and Phylogeny is one of the most influential books in the pre-evodevo period, and his last one -- as much as it could have definitely benefited from editing -- is a lasting contribution by a giant of the field. Maynard-Smith's comments were simply uncalled for, and possibly (I'm guessing) motivated either by jealousy or by an unjustified sense of intellectual superiority.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09099460671669064269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-22697677327251345732012-04-11T16:57:37.619-04:002012-04-11T16:57:37.619-04:00The paper seems to be rock solid. It does demonstr...The paper seems to be rock solid. It does demonstrate a shoddy attitude to scientific rigor on Gould's part. This accusation had previously been brought to Gould's privately, from what I hear, this issue had been simmering away for a long time before these accusations were finally published. Gould may not have consciously manipulated the data, but he did consciously ignore those telling him that they thought his analysis was flawed. Gould did, however, prove his point about the role of bias in science, in the most ironic way possible.<br /><br />I'm not a paleontologist, so can't judge Gould's contributions there. I don't see that his contributions to evolutionary theory at large were particularly profound. Eg, punctuated equilibrium is interesting enough, but he did not make it clear that punctuated equilibrium is NOT inconsistent with Darwinian gradualism, and by failing to make this clear from the outset, Gould succeeded in creating much confusion.Joanna Maselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14213528673854230496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-21129625059439290222012-04-11T16:36:43.960-04:002012-04-11T16:36:43.960-04:00Joanna,
that may be a bit harsh. Assuming the Lew...Joanna,<br /><br />that may be a bit harsh. Assuming the Lewis et al.'s paper is correct, they still do not accuse Gould of conscious manipulation of the data. And at any rate, the Morton affair has nothing to do with Gould's contributions to paleontology or evolutionary theory.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09099460671669064269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-18394922339180225272012-04-11T15:28:05.621-04:002012-04-11T15:28:05.621-04:00I am with Maynard Smith against Gould on this one....I am with Maynard Smith against Gould on this one. I don't think Gould's reputation will (or should) ever recover from the Mismeasure debacle of shoddy science. http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001071Joanna Maselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14213528673854230496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-26381827133152540612012-04-09T00:11:02.180-04:002012-04-09T00:11:02.180-04:00The deal is, Wright should know better, ethically ...The deal is, Wright should know better, ethically as well as intellectually. That said, he doesn't impress me that much.Gadflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075757287807731373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-49082670640566735192012-04-08T06:27:14.795-04:002012-04-08T06:27:14.795-04:00"When I talk about Free -will, nanoscience, a..."When I talk about Free -will, nanoscience, and certainly anything related to my actually field of study which is nuanced, no one cares to listen..."<br /><br />Boring and not quotable at all.Jim F.https://www.blogger.com/profile/18205756321281305797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-75626117776534323182012-04-07T21:17:49.478-04:002012-04-07T21:17:49.478-04:00This is the problem with becoming a public intelle...This is the problem with becoming a public intellectual Massimo. Easier for me to be obscure and unquoted;) That said to be one of the quoted, forces nuance to be missed. Every dissent needs to be have a disclaimer such as "while I agree with my esteemed colleagues Prof. Dennett et al on a number of topics...." and such nonsense. I am not sure how to cope with this.The only times I have ever had any of my blogs read are when I say some very inflammatory, non subtle things like "Francis Collins is a nut, and by Obama appointing him to the NIH, he has lost my respect". People read that. When I talk about Free -will, nanoscience, and certainly anything related to my actually field of study which is nuanced, no one cares to listen...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07835248533705400567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-65900412662744565552012-04-07T14:14:44.403-04:002012-04-07T14:14:44.403-04:00Pooh, they did not lie. They simply cherry picked ...Pooh, they did not lie. They simply cherry picked any purple-stained statements.jrhshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01074853182840350306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-91999197676626158362012-04-07T04:37:56.298-04:002012-04-07T04:37:56.298-04:00I'm shocked, shocked! Creationists being disho...I'm shocked, shocked! Creationists being dishonest, it can't be...Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12460075520187803334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-4580290443618857252012-04-07T04:06:29.121-04:002012-04-07T04:06:29.121-04:00I read it as Christians not being the only religio...I read it as Christians not being the only religionist creationists.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-38303219404541126832012-04-07T02:28:17.222-04:002012-04-07T02:28:17.222-04:00I read the comment as, "It's so interesti...I read the comment as, "It's so interesting that even after rigorously investigating Darwin's theories in an intellectually honest fashion and thereby determining that the process of evolution is real, ascertaining which of his ideas were accurate, which needed to be refined and which needed to be scrapped, and through this iterative process gaining a much more accurate understanding of how evolution works, people are still interested in asking intelligent questions about it and applying extraordinarily successful investigative methods to answering them so as to expand the frontier of human knowledge yet further."<br /><br />All of which essentially boils down to, "It's so interesting that cultures of knowledge persist even though cultures of ignorance are more normal."perspiciohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04756832342990830938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-66267692348056191242012-04-07T00:41:12.667-04:002012-04-07T00:41:12.667-04:00Rejection in some areas is a form of confirmation ...Rejection in some areas is a form of confirmation in others.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-54242223084312803442012-04-07T00:31:47.747-04:002012-04-07T00:31:47.747-04:00It's so interesting that after the rejection o...It's so interesting that after the rejection of most of Darwin's theories, the discussion is going on....AEPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01944078708653882675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-88783871906864699212012-04-06T22:06:54.815-04:002012-04-06T22:06:54.815-04:00I'm with you there, Roy. Dignifying the buffoo...I'm with you there, Roy. Dignifying the buffoons with a rebuttal is merely arguing with an <a href="http://www.bobdylan.com/us/songs/idiot-wind" rel="nofollow">iiiiiiidiot wind</a>.perspiciohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04756832342990830938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-49347312875504785402012-04-06T19:05:19.672-04:002012-04-06T19:05:19.672-04:00The Creationists seem to have got you both ways. ...The Creationists seem to have got you both ways. They've used part of what you've said to give credence to their views, and then count on your defensive reaction to push you further from the self-adaptive evolutionary positions they really fear.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-57609354051956693402012-04-06T17:09:38.899-04:002012-04-06T17:09:38.899-04:00Laughing too hard to rebut, but ye gods, is that a...Laughing too hard to rebut, but ye gods, is that author of the 'rational wiki' page slamming O'Leary a sad sack of hatefulness or what?<br /><br />Incoherent bloggers of all creeds rule. Language is way overrated anyway, even the digestible variety. I know that its hard work and a socially responsible thing to do when one deigns to form coherent sentences. But with every mental edit in favor of social acceptance or political correctness does the output not become less honest?DaveShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15840516954793215700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-50960363935029991382012-04-06T16:54:09.894-04:002012-04-06T16:54:09.894-04:00A very useful piece. And to expand a bit:[history/...A very useful piece. And to expand a bit:[history/ethics/literature/philosophy/et al.]is "an open-ended enterprise where progress is made in part precisely because people disagree." Which, I surmise, is why Plato wrote dialogues . . .Phiwillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05434702023421961210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-17344696710703785842012-04-06T16:14:38.162-04:002012-04-06T16:14:38.162-04:00P.S. The quote mine about plenty of research being...P.S. The quote mine about plenty of research being done without reference to evolutionary theory isn't even very original. The creationists did the same thing to Adam S. Wilkins:<br /><br />http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part4.html#quote4.8John Pierethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336244849636477317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-83529138833405375262012-04-06T16:13:25.049-04:002012-04-06T16:13:25.049-04:00> Incidentally, isn’t lying a violation of one ...<i>> Incidentally, isn’t lying a violation of one of the Ten Commandments? (It’s the 10th, 9th, 17th or 21st, depending on which version of the sacred scriptures you prefer.)</i><br /><br />Ah, but they aren't bearing false witness <i>against</i> you, you see. They're bearing false witness in your <i>favor</i>, so it's okay. Even leaving that aside, there's limitless room to maneuver when neither God nor Caesar is actively arbitrating the case.perspiciohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04756832342990830938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-3194797986865111062012-04-06T16:07:51.068-04:002012-04-06T16:07:51.068-04:00Welcome to the quote mines. You're in good com...Welcome to the quote mines. You're in good company:<br /><br />http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.htmlJohn Pierethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336244849636477317noreply@blogger.com