Natural Selection and Design: Comments on Michael Ruse's New Book

Zygon 37 (2):447-450 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Is the adaptive complexity of living organisms the result of evolutionary processes alone? or does it give evidence of intentional design? Michael Ruse appears to argue that we can have it either way. As a scientist I find the argument from design unnecessary. Yet it has great appeal to humans, whose behavior is largely intentional and who look for patterns in events and for the intentions that may have produced them.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Ruse's Treatment of the Evidence for Evolution: A Reconsideration.Alexander Rosenberg - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:83 - 93.
Michael Ruse's Design for Living.Robert J. Richards - 2004 - Journal of the History of Biology 37 (1):25 - 38.
Is sociobiology a new paradigm?Michael Ruse - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (1):98-104.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
38 (#417,943)

6 months
2 (#1,188,460)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references