This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
26 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. James T. Bradley (2007). Odysseans of the Twenty-First Century. Zygon 42 (4):999-1008.
    In his book Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies—and What It Means to Be Human (2005), author-journalist Joel Garreau identifies four technologies whose synergistic activity may transform humankind into a state transcending present human nature: genetic, robotic, information, and nano (GRIN) technologies. If the GRIN technologies follow Moore's Law, as information technology has done for the past four decades, Homo sapiens and human society may be unimaginably different before the middle of this century. But (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Christopher Eliot (2009). Darwinism and its Discontents. By Michael Ruse. [REVIEW] Metaphilosophy 40 (5):702-710.
  3. Gal Kober (2010). Michel J. Behe. In Roger Chapman (ed.), Culture Wars: An Encyclopedia of Issues, Viewpoints, and Voices. M.E. Sharpe. 39-40.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Gal Kober (2006). Review - Debating Design From Darwin to DNA by William A. Dembski and Michael Ruse (Editors) Cambridge University Press, 2004. [REVIEW] Metapsychology Online Reviews 10 (3).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. S. Law (2012). Naturalism, Evolution and True Belief. Analysis 72 (1):41-48.
    Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism aims to show that naturalism is, as he puts it, ‘incoherent or self defeating’. Plantinga supposes that, in the absence of any God-like being to guide the process, natural selection is unlikely to favour true belief. Plantinga overlooks the fact that adherents of naturalism may plausibly hold that there exist certain conceptual links between belief content and behaviour. Given such links, natural selection will favour true belief. A further rather surprising consequence of the existence of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (12 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Robert T. Pennock (2003). Creationism and Intelligent Design. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 4:143-163.
    Key Words creation science, evolution education s Abstract Creationism, the rejection of evolution in favor of supernatural design, comes in many varieties besides the common young-earth Genesis version. Creationist attacks on science education have been evolving in the last few years through the alliance of different varieties. Instead of calls to teach “creation science,” one now finds lobbying for “intelligent design” (ID). Guided by the Discovery Institute’s “Wedge strategy,” the ID movement aims to overturn evolution and what it sees as (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Massimo Pigliucci (2007). The Evolution-Creation Wars: Why Teaching More Science Just is Not Enough. McGill Journal of Education 42 (2):285-306.
    The creation-evolution “controversy” has been with us for more than a century. Here I argue that merely teaching more science will probably not improve the situation; we need to understand the controversy as part of a broader problem with public acceptance of pseudoscience, and respond by teaching how science works as a method. Critical thinking is difficult to teach, but educators can rely on increasing evidence from neurobiology about how the brain learns, or fails to.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Massimo Pigliucci (2007). The Problems with Creationism. In A. J. Petto & L. R. Godfrey (eds.), Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism. Norton.
    On the cultural roots, philosophical issues and science education of various blends of creationism.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Massimo Pigliucci (2007). Creationism as a Cultural, Not Scientific, Issue. In T. Flynn (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief. Prometheus.
    Why creationism is an important cultural, but scientifically negligible, phenomenon.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Massimo Pigliucci (2002). Defending Evolution, as Strange as It May Seem. [REVIEW] Evolution 56 (1):206-208.
    The wake-up call has been sounded many times, and yet scientists and science educators keep trying to ignore it: turn- ing the other cheek, asleep in their ivory towers. Creationists have made steady advances since the 1960s, despite having been repeatedly and soundly defeated in the courtrooms (the last time they won a legal battle was at the Scopes trial in Tennessee in 1925). The advances are being made at the level that is farthest from the everyday concern of most (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Massimo Pigliucci (2002). Denying Evolution: Creation, Scientism, and the Nature of Science. Sinauer.
    Denying Evolution aims at taking a fresh look at the evolution–creation controversy. It presents a truly “balanced” treatment, not in the sense of treating creationism as a legitimate scientific theory (it demonstrably is not), but in the sense of dividing the blame for the controversy equally between creationists and scientists—the former for subscribing to various forms of anti-intellectualism, the latter for discounting science education and presenting science as scientism to the public and the media. The central part of the book (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Massimo Pigliucci (1998). Science, Religion, and All That Jazz. [REVIEW] BioScience 48 (5):406-407.
    An historian takes a close look at the infamous Scopes trial and its aftermath.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Alvin Plantinga (1996). Methodological Naturalism. In Jitse M. van der Meer (ed.), Facets of Faith and Science, Volume I: Historiography and Modes of Interaction.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Alvin Plantinga (1992). On Rejecting the Theory of Common Ancestry: A Reply to Hasker. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 44:258-63.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alvin Plantinga (1991). Evolution, Neutrality, and Antecedent Probability: A Reply to Van Till and McMullin. Christian Scholar's Review 21 (1):80-109.
    First, I'd like to thank Professors Van Till, Pun, and McMullin for their careful and thoughtful replies. There is a deep level of agreement among all four of us; as is customary with replies and replies to replies, however, I shall concentrate on our areas of disagreement. In the cases of Van Till and McMullin, this may give an impression of deeper disagreement than actually exists. In the case of Pun it leaves me with little to say except Yea and (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Alvin Plantinga (1991). When Faith and Reason Clash: Evolution and the Bible. Christian Scholar's Review 21 (1):8-32.
    My question is simple: how shall we Christians deal with apparent conflicts between faith and reason, between what we know as Christians and what we know in other ways, between teaching of the Bible and the teachings of science? As a special case, how shall we deal with apparent conflicts between what the Bible initially seems to tell us about the origin and development of life, and what contemporary science seems to tell us about it? Taken at face value, the (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Philip L. Quinn (1984). The Philosopher of Science as Expert Witness. In James T. Cushing, C. F. Delany & Gary M. Gutting (eds.), Science and Reality: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Science. University of Notre Dame Press.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Del Ratzsch (2002). Design Theory and its Critics: Monologues Passing in the Night. [REVIEW] Ars Disputandi 2.
  19. Reed Richter, American Science and its Anti-Evolutionist Critics: It's the Evidence Stupid.
    This is an unpublished talk written for a meeting of French philosophers. The paper describes the evolution versus creationism/intelligent design controversy in the U.S. A number of philosophers and scientists try to resolve this issue by sharply distinguishing the realm of science versus any talk of the supernatural. These pro-evolutionists often appeal to science's essential commitment to "methodological naturalism," the view that scientific methodology is essentially committed to naturalism and cannot meaningfully entertain hypotheses concerning the supernatural. I criticize methodological naturalism, (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Reed Richter (2002). What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.
    This paper rejects a view of science called "methodological naturalism." -/- According to many defenders of mainstream science and Darwinian evolution, anti-evolution critics--creationists and intelligent design proponents--are conceptually and epistemologically confusing science and religion, a supernatural view of world. These defenders of evolution contend that doing science requires adhering to a methodology that is strictly and essentially naturalistic: science is essentially committed to "methodological naturalism" and assumes that all the phenomena it investigates are entirely natural and consistent with the laws (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Michael Ruse (1982). Creation Science Is Not Science. Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (40):72-8.
  22. Michael Ruse (1982). Response to the Commentary: Pro Judice. Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (41):19-23.
  23. Marco Solinas (2012). L'impronta dell'inutilità. Dalla teleologia di Aristotele alle genealogie di Darwin. ETS.
    The book aims to offer a contribution to the historiographical and conceptual reconfiguration of the evolutionary revolution in the light of the centuries-old tenets of the Aristotelian biological tradition. Darwin’s breakthrough constitutes a thorough overturning of the fixist, essentialist and teleological framework created by Aristotle, a framework still dominant in the 17th Century world of Harvey and Ray, as well as Galileo, and then hegemonic until Linnaeus and Cuvier. This change is exemplified in the morphological analysis of useless parts, such (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Thomas F. Tracy (2013). Divine Purpose and Evolutionary Processes. Zygon 48 (2):454-465.
    When Darwin's theory of natural selection threatened to put Paley's Designer out of a job, one response was to reemploy God as the author of the evolutionary process itself. This idea requires an account of how God might be understood to act in biological history. I approach this question in two stages: first, by considering God's action as creator of the world as a whole, and second, by exploring the idea of particular divine action in the course of evolution. As (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. John S. Wilkins (2012). Could God Create Darwinian Accidents? Zygon 47 (1):30-42.
    Abstract Charles Darwin, in his discussions with Asa Gray and in his published works, doubted whether God could so arrange it that exactly the desired contingent events would occur to cause particular outcomes by natural selection. In this paper, I argue that even a limited or neo-Leibnizian deity could have chosen a world that satisfied some arbitrary set of goals or functions in its outcomes and thus answer Darwin's conundrum. In more general terms, this supports the consistency of natural selection (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Andrew S. Yang (2008). Matters of Demarcation: Philosophy, Biology, and the Evolving Fraternity Between Disciplines. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (2):211 – 225.
    The influence that philosophy of science has had on scientific practice is as controversial as it is undeniable, especially in the case of biology. The dynamic between philosophy and biology as disciplines has developed along two different lines that can be characterized as 'paternal', on the one hand, and more 'fraternal', on the other. The role Popperian principles of demarcation and falsifiability have played in both the systematics community as well as the ongoing evolution-creation debates illustrate these contrasting forms of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation