Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (3):446-455 (2010)
|Abstract||In this discussion, Steve Fuller’s book Dissent over Descent is criticized mainly because he draws conclusions from wishful thinking and uses ancient and medieval scientists as well as theologians in his efforts to invalidate the theory of evolution. He is also criticized for drawing universal conclusions from a Eurocentric version of history. If science and technology studies is to regain its reputation, its representatives have to use relevant statements and argue more rationally|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
William Keith (1995). De Rhetorica Fullerae. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 25 (4):488-496.
Sahotra Sarkar (2008). Review of Steve Fuller, Science V. Religion? Intelligent Design and the Problem of Evolution. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (8).
Steve Fuller (2004). The Case of Fuller Vs Kuhn. Social Epistemology 18 (1):3 – 49.
Steve Fuller (2001). Discussion Note: Is There Philosophical Life After Kuhn? Philosophy of Science 68 (4):565-572.
Francis Remedios (2003). Legitimizing Scientific Knowledge: An Introduction to Steve Fuller's Social Epistemology. Lexington Books.
I. Jarvie (2010). Dissent About Descent: Evolution, Design, and Education. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (3):467-478.
J. Shearmur (2010). Steve Fuller and Intelligent Design. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (3):433-445.
S. Fuller (2010). The Dissent Over Dissent Over Descent. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (3):479-503.
Bradford McCall (2011). Dissent Over Descent: Intelligent Design's Challenge to Darwinism. By Steve Fuller. Heythrop Journal 52 (2):318-319.
Added to index2010-08-11
Total downloads3 ( #213,351 of 722,876 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,876 )
How can I increase my downloads?