352 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
Michael Ruse [353]Michael E. Ruse [9]Michael Scott Ruse [1]
See also:
Profile: Michael Ruse (Florida State University, Florida State University)
Profile: Michael Ruse (University of Sydney)
  1. Edward O. Wilson, Arthur L. Caplan, Daniel G. Freedman & Michael Ruse (1982). On Human Nature. Ethics 92 (2):327-340.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   461 citations  
  2. Michael Ruse (1986). Taking Darwin Seriously: A Naturalistic Approach to Philosophy. Prometheus Books.
  3. Michael Ruse (1979). Sociobiology Sense or Nonsense?
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   100 citations  
  4. David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.) (1998). The Philosophy of Biology. Oxford University Press.
    Drawing on work of the past decade, this volume brings together articles from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science, and many other branches of the biological sciences. The volume delves into the latest theoretical controversies as well as burning questions of contemporary social importance. The issues considered include the nature of evolutionary theory, biology and ethics, the challenge from religion, and the social implications of biology today (in particular the Human Genome Project).
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   38 citations  
  5. Michael Ruse (1973). The Philosophy of Biology. London,Hutchinson.
  6. Michael Ruse (2003). Darwin and Design Does Evolution Have a Purpose?
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   20 citations  
  7. Michael Ruse (1981). Is Science Sexist? And Other Problems in the Biomedical Sciences. D. Reidel Distributed in the U.S.A. And Canada by Kluwer Boston.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   53 citations  
  8. Michael Ruse (2010). Science and Spirituality: Making Room for Faith in the Age of Science. Cambridge University Press.
    Michael Ruse offers a new analysis of the often troubled relationship between science and religion. Arguing against both extremes - in one corner, the New Atheists; in the other, the Creationists and their offspring the Intelligent Designers - he asserts that science is the highest source of human inquiry. Yet, by its very nature and its deep reliance on metaphor, science restricts itself and is unable to answer basic, significant questions about the meaning of the universe and humankind's place within (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  9.  1
    Michael Ruse (1999). Monad to Man: The Concept of Progress in Evolutionary Biology. Journal of the History of Biology 32 (1):197-204.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   36 citations  
  10. Michael Ruse (2000). The Darwinian Revolution: Science Red in Tooth and Claw. Journal of the History of Biology 33 (2):399-401.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   31 citations  
  11. Kim Sterelny, Paul E. Griffiths, David L. Hull, Michael Ruse & Jane Maienschein (2000). Sex and Death: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Biology. Journal of the History of Biology 33 (1):181-187.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   27 citations  
  12.  15
    Michael Ruse (ed.) (2007). Philosophy of Biology. Prometheus Books.
    Biologists study life in its various physical forms, while philosophers of biology seek answers to questions about the nature, purpose, and impact of this research. What permits us to distinguish between living and nonliving things even though both are made of the same minerals? Is the complex structure of organisms proof that a creative force is working its will in the physical universe, or are existing life-forms the random result of an evolutionary process working itself out over eons of time? (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  13.  12
    Michael Ruse (2015). Why I Am an Accommodationist and Proud of It. Zygon 50 (2):361-375.
    There is a strong need of a reasoned defense of what was known as the “independence” position of the science–religion relationship but that more recently has been denigrated as the “accommodationist” position, namely that while there are parts of religion—fundamentalist Christianity in particular—that clash with modern science, the essential parts of religion do not and could not clash with science. A case for this position is made on the grounds of the essentially metaphorical nature of science. Modern science functions because (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  14. Michael Ruse (1987). Biological Species: Natural Kinds, Individuals, or What? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (2):225-242.
    What are biological species? Aristotelians and Lockeans agree that they are natural kinds; but, evolutionary theory shows that neither traditional philosophical approach is truly adequate. Recently, Michael Ghiselin and David Hull have argued that species are individuals. This claim is shown to be against the spirit of much modern biology. It is concluded that species are natural kinds of a sort, and that any 'objectivity' they possess comes from their being at the focus of a consilience of inductions.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  15. Michael Ruse (1984). Genesis Revisited: Can We Do Better Than God? Zygon 19 (3):297-316.
    WE ARE FACED WITH GROWING POWERS OF MANIPULATION OF OUR HUMAN GENETIC MAKEUP. WHILE NOT DENYING THAT THESE POWERS CAN BE USED FOR GREAT GOOD, IT BEHOOVES US TO THINK NOW OF POSSIBLE UPPER LIMITS TO THE CHANGE THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO EFFECT. I ARGUE THAT THOUGHTS OF CHANGING THE HUMAN SPECIES INTO A RACE OF SUPERMEN AND SUPERWOMEN ARE BASED ON WEAK PREMISES. GENETIC FINE-TUNING MAY INDEED BE IN ORDER; WHOLESALE GENETIC CHANGE IS NOT.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  6
    Michael Ruse (2001). Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? Philosophical Inquiry 23 (3-4):156-159.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   22 citations  
  17.  91
    Michael Ruse & Edward O. Wilson (1986). Moral Philosophy as Applied Science. Philosophy 61 (236):173 - 192.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   32 citations  
  18. Maureen Durnin, Michael Hoy & Michael Ruse (2012). Genetic Testing and Insurance: The Complexity of Adverse Selection. Ethical Perspectives 19 (1):123-54.
    The debate on whether insurance companies should be allowed to use results of individuals’ genetic tests for underwriting purposes has been both lively and increasingly relevant over the past two decades. Yet there appears to be no widely agreed upon resolution regarding appropriate and effective regulation. There exists today a gamut of recommendations and actual practices addressing this phenomenon ranging from laissez-faire to voluntary industry moratoria to strict legal prohibition. One obvious reason for such a variance in views and approaches (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19. Michael Ruse, William A. Dembski, Matt Young, Taner Edis & John Brockman (2006). The Evolution-Creation Struggle. Journal of the History of Biology 39 (3):607-635.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  20.  27
    Michael Ruse (1981). Medicine as Social Science: The Case of Freud on Homosexuality. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (4):361-386.
    This paper considers the question of whether the explanation of homosexual orientation offered by Sigmund Freud qualifies as a genuine explanation, judged by the criteria of the social sciences. It is argued that the explanation, namely that homosexual orientation is a function of atypical parental influences, is indeed an explanation of the kind found in the social sciences. Nevertheless, it is concluded that to date Freud's hypotheses about homosexuality are no more than unproven speculations. Also considered is the question of (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   41 citations  
  21. Michael Ruse (2007). Darwinism and Its Discontents. Journal of the History of Biology 40 (3):592-594.
    Presenting an ardent defence of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, this book offers a clear and comprehensive exposition of Darwin's thinking. Michael Ruse brings the story up to date, examining the origins of life, the fossil record, and the mechanism of natural selection. Rival theories are explored, from punctuated equilibrium to human evolution . The philosophical and religious implications of Darwinism are discussed, including a discussion of Creationism and its modern day offshoot, Intelligent Design Theory. Ruse draws upon the most (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  22. Michael Ruse (1983). Darwinism Defended: A Guide to the Evolution Controversies. Journal of the History of Biology 16 (3):441-442.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   38 citations  
  23. Michael Ruse (2011). Making Room for Faith in an Age of Science: A Response to David Wisdo. Zygon 46 (3):655-672.
    Abstract. I respond to the criticisms of David Wisdo of my position on the relationship between science and religion. I argue that although he gives a full and fair account of my position, he fails to grasp fully my use of the metaphorical basis of modern science in my argument that, because of its mechanistic commitment, there are some questions that science not only does not answer but that science does not even attempt to answer. Hence, my position stands and (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24. Michael Ruse (2005). Darwinism and Mechanism: Metaphor in Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 36 (2):285-302.
    There are two main senses of ‘mechanism’, both deriving from the metaphor of nature as a machine. One sense refers to contrivance or design, as in ‘the plant’s mechanism of attracting butterflies’. The other sense refers to cause or law process, as in ‘the mechanism of heredity’. In his work on evolution, Charles Darwin showed that organisms are produced by a mechanism in the second sense, although he never used this language. He also discussed contrivance, where he did use the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  25.  83
    Michael Ruse (2012). The Compatibility of Science and Religion: Why the Warfare Thesis Is False. In Yujin Nagasawa (ed.), Scientific Approaches to the Philosophy of Religion. Palgrave Macmillan 255.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Michael Ruse (2001). Mystery of Mysteries: Is Evolution a Social Construction? Journal of the History of Biology 34 (1):199-200.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  27.  70
    Michael Ruse (2012). Science and Values: My Debt to Ernan McMullin. Zygon 47 (4):666-685.
    Ernan McMullin's 1982 presidential address to the Philosophy of Science Association dealt with the issue of science and values, arguing that although scientists are rightfully wary of the infiltration of cultural and social values, their work is guided by “epistemic values,” such as the drive for consistency and predictive fertility. McMullin argued that it is the pursuit of these epistemic values that drives nonepistemic values from science. Using the case study of the fate of the nonepistemic value of progress in (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  28.  6
    Michael Ruse (1989). The Darwinian Paradigm: Essays on its History, Philosophy, and Religious Implications. Routledge.
    INTRODUCTION I first read Charles Darwin's masterpiece, On the Origin of Species , some twenty years ago. At once I fell under its spell - an emotion which ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  29. Michael Ruse (2005). Methodological Naturalism Under Attack. South African Journal of Philosophy 24 (1):44-60.
    Methodological naturalism is the assumption or working hypothesis that understanding nature (the physical world including humans and their thoughts and actions) can be understood in terms of unguided laws. There is no need to Suppose interventions (miracles) from outside. It does not commit one to metaphysical naturalism, the belief that there is nothing other than nature as we can see and observe it (in other words, that atheism is the right theology for the sound thinker). Recently the Intelligent Design movement (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  30.  70
    Michael Ruse (2004). Darwinism and Atheism: A Marriage Made in Heaven? Think 2 (6):51.
    This chapter contains sections titled: * Biblical Literalism * Miracles * Design * Morality * Original Sin * Natural Evil * Contingency * Conclusion * References * Further Reading.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  97
    Michael Ruse (2012). Making Room For Faith In An Age Of Science. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 85:43-58.
    Are science and religion necessarily in conflict? This essay, by stressing the importance of metaphor in scientific understanding, argues that this is not so. There are certain important questions about existence, ethics, sentience and ultimate meaning and purpose that not only does science not answer but that science does not even attempt to answer. One does not necessarily have to turn to religion—one could remain agnostic or skeptical—but nothing in science precludes religion from offering answers. One may criticize the answers (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Michael Ruse (2007). My Journey in the World of Religion-and-Science. Zygon 42 (3):577-582.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  33. Michael Ruse (2012). Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?: The Relationship Between Science and Religion. Cambridge University Press.
    This book, first published in 2000, adopts a balanced perspective on the subject to offer a serious examination of both Darwinism and Christianity. He covers a wide range of topics, from the Scopes Monkey Trial to claims about the religious significance of extraterrestrials. He deals with major figures in the current science/religion debate and considers in detail the claims of the new creationism, revealing some surprising parallels between Darwinian materialists and traditional thinkers such as St. Augustine. Michael Ruse argues that, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  34.  4
    Michael Ruse (1981). Species as Individuals: Logical, Biological, and Philosophical Problems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4 (2):299.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   26 citations  
  35.  1
    Michael Ruse (1988). Philosophy of Biology Today. State University of New York Press.
    This short and highly accessible volume opens up the subject of the philosophy of biology to professionals and to students in both disciplines. The text covers briefly and clearly all of the pertinent topics in the subject, dealing with both human and non-human issues, and quite uniquely surveying not only scholars in the English-speaking world but others elsewhere, including the Eastern block. As molecular biologists peer ever more deeply into life’s mysteries, there are those who fear that such ‘reductionism’ conceals (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  36.  98
    Michael Ruse (1975). Darwin's Debt to Philosophy: An Examination of the Influence of the Philosophical Ideas of John F.W. Herschel and William Whewell on the Development of Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 6 (2):159-181.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  37.  28
    Michael Ruse (1998). Booknotes. Biology and Philosophy 13 (1):145-152.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38.  26
    David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.) (2007). The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press.
    The philosophy of biology is one of the most exciting new areas in the field of philosophy and one that is attracting much attention from working scientists. This Companion, edited by two of the founders of the field, includes newly commissioned essays by senior scholars and up-and-coming younger scholars who collectively examine the main areas of the subject - the nature of evolutionary theory, classification, teleology and function, ecology, and the problematic relationship between biology and religion, among other topics. Up-to-date (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  39.  33
    Michael Ruse (ed.) (2009). Philosophy After Darwin: Classic and Contemporary Readings. Princeton University Press.
    Introduction -- Part I: Epistemology after Darwin -- Part II: Ethics after Darwin -- Part III: The evolution of ideas -- Part IV: The evolution of rationality -- - Part V: Ethics and progress -- Part VI: The evolution of altruism.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  40.  8
    Michael Ruse (2006). Charles Darwin and Group Selection. Annals of Science 37 (6):615-630.
    The question of the levels at which natural selection can be said to operate is much discussed by biologists today and is a key factor in the recent controversy about sociobiology. It is shown that this problem is one to which Charles Darwin addressed himself at some length. It is argued that apart from some slight equivocation over man, Darwin opted firmly for hypotheses supposing selection always to work at the level of the individual rather than the group. However, natural (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  41.  98
    Michael Ruse (1982). Creation Science Is Not Science. Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 (40):72-8.
  42.  63
    Michael Ruse (1986). Evolutionary Ethics: A Phoenix Arisen. Zygon 21 (1):95-112.
  43.  28
    Michael Ruse (1969). Definitions of Species in Biology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 20 (2):97-119.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   26 citations  
  44. Michael Ruse (1990). Homosexuality: A Philosophical Inquiry. Blackwell.
  45.  4
    Michael Ruse (2008). Evolution and Religion: A Dialogue. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Ruse, a leading expert on Charles Darwin, presents a fictional dialogue among characters with sharply contrasting positions regarding the tensions between science and religious belief.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  46. Michael Ruse (ed.) (1988). But is It Science?: The Philosophical Question in the Creation/Evolution Controversy. Prometheus Books.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  47. David Sepkoski & Michael Ruse (2009). The Paleobiological Revolution: Essays on the Growth of Modern Paleontology. Journal of the History of Biology 42 (4):819-821.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  48. William A. Dembski & Michael Ruse (eds.) (2004). Debating Design From Darwin to Dna. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
    In this book, first published in 2004, William Dembski, Michael Ruse, and other prominent philosophers provide a comprehensive balanced overview of the debate concerning biological origins - a controversial dialectic since Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859. Invariably, the source of controversy has been 'design'. Is the appearance of design in organisms the result of purely natural forces acting without prevision or teleology? Or, does the appearance of design signify genuine prevision and teleology, and, if so, is that (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  49.  19
    Michael Ruse (1995). Evolutionary Naturalism: Selected Essays. Routledge.
    Evolutionary Naturalism is a collection of interconnected essays on the history and philosopy of evolutionary biology written by the influential Canadian philosopher, Michael Ruse. In this book, he argues that the time has arrived to take philosophy out of the hands of the academic theorists and to fully embrace the findings and consequences of the modern sciences. These clearly written essays cover a broad range of key topics in the philosophy of science. Michael Ruse discusses several issues in the history (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  50.  66
    Michael Ruse (2010). The Biological Sciences Can Act as a Ground for Ethics. In Francisco José Ayala & Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology. Wiley-Blackwell Pub.
    This paper is interested in the relationship between evolutionary thinking and moral behavior and commitments, ethics. There is a traditional way of forging or conceiving of the relationship. This is traditional evolutionary ethics, known as Social Darwinism. Many think that this position is morally pernicious, a redescription of the worst aspects of modern, laissez-faire capitalism in fancy biological language. It is argued that, in fact, there is much more to be said for Social Darwinism than many think. In respects, it (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
1 — 50 / 352