David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Philosophical Quarterly 43 (2):159-166 (2003)
Contemporary biologists generally agree with E. O. Wilson’s claim that “reduction is the traditional instrument of scientific analysis.” This is certainly true of Michael Ruse, who has attempted to provide a Darwinian account of human scientific knowledge in terms of epigenetic rules. Such an account depends on the characterization of natural objects as the chance concatenations of material elements, making natural form an effect rather than a cause of the object. This characterization, however, can be shown to be false in that it is self-refuting in its exclusion of formal cause. The retorsive argument for formal cause dialectically shows that any attempt to explain a natural object depends on the identification of form as the cause of the intelligibility of the object. It follows that Darwinian explanations of the products of human culture, such as science, cannot consistently treat form as an effect rather than a cause
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(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
Bence Nanay (2011). Popper's Darwinian Analogy. Perspectives on Science 19 (3):337-354.
William A. Rottschaefer & David Martinsen (1990). Really Taking Darwin Seriously: An Alternative to Michael Ruse's Darwinian Metaethics. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 5 (2):149-173.
Michael Ruse (2000). Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? Sociobiological Issues. Zygon 35 (2):299-316.
David Bloor (2005). Toward a Sociology of Epistemic Things. Perspectives on Science 13 (3):285-312.
André Kukla (1994). Scientific Realism, Scientific Practice, and the Natural Ontological Attitude. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (4):955-975.
Joseph Rouse (1990). The Narrative Reconstruction of Science. Inquiry 33 (2):179 – 196.
Claus Beisbart (2009). Kant's Characterization of Natural Ends. Kant Yearbook 1 (1).
Matt Gers (2012). Overqualified: Generative Replicators as Darwinian Reproducers. Biology and Philosophy 27 (4):595-605.
Alexander Rosenberg (1980). Ruse's Treatment of the Evidence for Evolution: A Reconsideration. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:83 - 93.
Stephen R. L. Clark (2000). Have Biologists Wrapped Up Philosophy? Inquiry 43 (2):143 – 165.
Luca Malatesti (2008). Mary's Scientific Knowledge. Prolegomena 7 (1):37-59.
Richard Machalek & Michael W. Martin (2004). Sociology and the Second Darwinian Revolution: A Metatheoretical Analysis. Sociological Theory 22 (3):455-476.
Joseph Shieber (2009). Epistemological Contextualism and the Knowledge Account of Assertion. Philosophia 37 (1):169-181.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads14 ( #255,642 of 1,906,946 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #468,378 of 1,906,946 )
How can I increase my downloads?