David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Today the idea that an evolutionary approach may be fruitful for research in the social sciences is being passionately defended by some and no less passionately contested by others. The resistance to Darwinism comes mainly in two distinct varieties. The first type of criticism is based on empirical or methodological objections against the current attempts to use evolutionary considerations to throw some light on social science explananda. The other line of opposition, however, is much harder to pin down and discuss because it is fueled more by rhetoric than by argument. It defines itself, rather vaguely, as a fight against “biological reductionism” and “genetic determinism” and is often accompanied by slight (or not so slight) ideological overtones. In this chapter, I will deal only with the former (methodological) kind of criticism. But since I don’t want to leave the latter, hazily antireductionist source of opposition to biology without comments, and since I don’t know how to approach it in a serious way, let me wiggle out by presenting to you a rhymed parody, “Gene-mania,” that captures some of the more ideological criticism’s characteristic flavor.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Tomi J. Kallio (2007). Taboos in Corporate Social Responsibility Discourse. Journal of Business Ethics 74 (2):165 - 175.
Brant Pridmore (2008). Review of Genes in Development: Re-Reading the Molecular Paradigm. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):579-586.
Alan Haworth (2001). Genes and Citizens: Can Moral Philosophy Learn From Evolutionary Biology? Res Publica 7 (2):137-157.
Karola Stotz & Paul Griffiths (2004). Genes: Philosophical Analyses Put to the Test. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 26 (1):5 - 28.
Robert A. Wilson (2005). Genes and the Agents of Life: The Individual in the Fragile Sciences, Biology. Cambridge University Press.
Kim Sterelny, Kelly C. Smith & Michael Dickison (1996). The Extended Replicator. Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):377-403.
Holmes Rolston (2006). What is a Gene? From Molecules to Metaphysics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (6):471-497.
Peter J. Beurton, Raphael Falk & Hans-Jörg Rheinberger (eds.) (2000). The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution: Historical and Epistemological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
R. Makarius & E. P. Halperin (1960). The Incest Prohibition and Food Taboos. Diogenes 8 (30):41-61.
Jerome Neu (1976). What is Wrong with Incest? Inquiry 19 (1-4):27 – 39.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads51 ( #39,922 of 1,692,913 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #78,896 of 1,692,913 )
How can I increase my downloads?