Sent from my iPad
On 08.09.2013, at 22:28, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 chris peck <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> "Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical >>> >> research program". >> >> > I don't have any problem with Popper's comments here. I see no reason >> > whatsoever for 'Popper fans or fans of philosophers of science' to be >> > concerned in the slightest. > > Yes I know, fans of Popper are not concerned in the slightest with their hero > making that moronic statement, and Popper called himself a philosopher; and > that is exactly how philosophy gets a bad name. > >> > People misunderstand Popper here. > > Apparently even Popper misunderstood Popper because, to his credit, he > admitted he was wrong about Darwin; most other philosophers would rather eat > ground glass than admit they were wrong. It's just a pity that it took this > great philosopher of science 119 years after the publication of "The Origin > Of Species" to figure out that Darwin was a scientist. I guess philosophers > are just slow learners > >> > Furthermore, in regarding natural selection as untestable he followed in >> > the footsteps of many Darwinists. > > Should a good philosopher be following in somebody's footsteps or should he > tell him he's going in the wrong direction? > >> > It was quite common to think that the concept of 'survival of the fittest' >> > involved circular reasoning and was therefore tautological. ie. 'fittest' >> > is defined as 'those that survive' and so 'survival of the fittest' >> > amounts to saying 'the survivors survive'. > > > > Darwin gave a new meaning to the word, "fittest" means passing on more genes > that endure (survive) to the next generation than somebody who is less fit. Darwin knew nothing about genes. > And if philosophers see something circular in that then that is yet another > reason philosophy has a bad name. > >> > Can't see that ever being falsified. > > Nearly a century ago J.B.S. Haldane was confronted with a bonehead who said > he thought Evolution was not a scientific theory because he was unable to > provide a hypothetical way it could be disproved. In response Haldane > thundered "RABBITS IN THE PRECAMBRIAN !". > >> > Secondly, I admire Popper for not just accepting Darwinism by rote. For >> > calling things as he saw them, even if he called it wrong. Good for him > > I believe sincerity is a hugely overrated virtue, I have more respect for > somebody insincerely right than sincerely wrong. > > John K Clark > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
