Descent Of Man Revisited

Book Blog

Descent Of Man Revisited header image 2

Climbing Mt. Improbable and the Dawkins religion in the fraud zone…

July 16th, 2013 · No Comments

The claim that natural selection can climb Mt. Improbable puts the Dawkins religion in the fraud zone…
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap2_2_2.htm

————————

The debate over natural selection has gone on too long. Darwinists should have long since confessed the metaphysical speculation and methodological abuse of right science latent in Darwin’s theory. We need to be finished with the matter by demanding proper proof. It is an issue of science, not religion. Where did Darwin go wrong? Darwin’s theory is a provocative generalization applied to immense vistas of time that are unobserved. Those unobserved intervals in deep time can fool us badly.

http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap2_2_1.htm
——————-
WHEE series #7: The Metaphysics of Evolution

The Metaphysics of Evolution The philosophy of Kant offers a useful benchmark for the examination of evolutionary theories as these impinge on the intractable issues of metaphysics. Questions, he warns, of god, soul or self, and free will are destined to exhibit antinomies that will haunt any universal generalization. We have the Darwin debate in a nutshell, and can see at once that Darwinian natural selection, used as the universal talisman of metaphysical reduction, presumes judgment on unobserved totalities, and is troubled on each of these questions. Questions of divinity founder in the design debate, of soul in the basic definition of self and organism, and free will in the attempts to reduce moral action to the mechanization of adaptationism. Current biology lacks so much as a basic definition of the organism.

http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap2_1.htm
————————

WHEE series #6: why is the evolution debate so intractable?
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/chap2_1.htm

The strange reality of the Darwin/evolution debate is that both sides get it wrong. Design arguments unkdermine natural selection but don’t really answer the question of ‘what evolution is’.
Darwinists have no real observational basis for their claims: all we see in deep time is a general trend of evolution.
We need a new approach all around.

One riddle resolved by a second, and a third
The puzzle of the Axial begins to resolve itself if we see its connection to two others: the rise of the modern, and the sudden discontinuity in the earliier phase of civilization
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/intro1_2_4.htm

———————

http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/intro1_2_3.htm
Confusion over evolutionary or historical discontinuity found a means of resolution in the discovery of the Axial Age…
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/intro1_2_2.htm
The ideas of Spengler and toynbee have produced a good deal of confusion: Spengler on the ‘decline of the west’ was very confused: he thought of the enlightenment as decline…
——————
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/intro1_2_3.htm
The discovery of the Axial Age is the starting point for a new understanding of evolution…
——————
http://history-and-evolution.com/whee4th/intro1_1_1.htm
Starting a new series on WHEE online….
One reason the so-called ‘macro model’ or the ‘eonic effect’ holds the real secret of evolution is the way its shows the overdetermination of change via localized transitions.
Darwinists seem to think a single mutation in a single individual in an isolated region could survive being swamped and move to influence an entire species. It is an absurd theory. The macro effect shows the way ‘evolution’ has to protect and actively spread its innovations…

Tags: Uncategorized