“Music As a Coevolved System for Social Bonding” is a brilliant synthesis and appealing hypothesis offering insights into the evolution and social bonding of musicality, but is so broad and sweeping it will be challenging to test, prove or falsify in the Popperian sense. After general comments, I focus my critique on underlying neurobiological mechanisms, and offer some suggestions for experimental tests of MSB.

Doing and Being confronts the problem of how to understand two central concepts of Aristotle's philosophy: energeia and dunamis. While these terms seem ambiguous between actuality/potentiality and activity/capacity, Aristotle did not intend them to be so. Through a careful and detailed reading of Metaphysics Theta, Beere argues that we can solve the problem by rejecting both "actuality" and "activity" as translations of energeia, and by working out an analogical conception of energeia. This approach enables Beere to discern a hitherto unnoticed (...) connection between Plato's Sophist and Aristotle's Metaphysics Theta, and to give satisfying interpretations of the major claims that Aristotle makes in Metaphysics Theta, the claim that energeia is prior in being to capacity and the claim that any eternal principle must be perfectly good. (shrink)

Doing and Being confronts the problem of how to understand two central concepts of Aristotle's philosophy: energeia and dunamis.

A unique response to the challenging questions raised in the science and religion dialogue by drawing on Hindu theology. Edelmann replies to the sciences through close reading of an important Hindu text, the Bhāgavata Puraṇa, as well engaging with Hindu philosophical disciplines such as Saṁkhya-Yoga.

While it is common to observe that our society and world are becoming increasingly complex and fast paced, most of our theories provide no bases upon which to develop appropriate strategies. The need for developing holistic strategies is becoming urgent in two related areas: major interactive technologies and morality.

"--Daniel Callahan, cofounder of the Hastings Center "Doctors and people who have no choice but to trust doctors--which means all of us--need to read this book.

As levels of trust decrease and the necessity for trust increase in our society, we are increasingly driven toward the untoward, even disastrous, outcomes of the prisoner's dilemma. Yet despite the growing evidence that (re)building conditions of trust is increasingly mandatory in our era, modern moral philosophy (by default) and the social sciences (implicitly) legitimize an instrumental rationality which is the root problem. The greatest danger is that as conditions of trust are rationalized away through the progressive institutionalization of an (...) instrumental rationality, we are driven towards the most virulent form of the prisoner's paradox — ethical relativism and its nihilistic consequences. (shrink)

When our society holds widely shared norms and values, we can agree on what constitutes unethical business practices. To the extent our social consensus is unraveling, agreement becomes increasingly problematic. Unfortunately, mainstream Western moral philosophy offers no guidance in this situation. We must therefore begin to focus on the types of social relationships that must exist for there to be agreement on what is right, good and just. This line of argument is, at best, merely suggested in discussions and articles (...) on business ethics. (shrink)

Our methods of inquiry predetermine most of what we are able to know. While our modes of understanding ought to correspond to the complexities confronting us in our modern technological society, they do not. Soft systems methodology helps us focus on what is problematic and how it can be approached — and offers direction to exert moral control over our tools and technologies. [Powerful new technologies] pose basic threats to people and to life on Earth . . . Unless we (...) learn to live with them in safety, our future is likely to be both exciting and short. We cannot hope to foresee all the problems ahead, yet by paying attention to the big, basic issues, we can perhaps foresee the greatest challenges and get some idea of how to deal with them (K. Erik Drexler, 1986). (shrink)

Our methods of inquiry predetermine most of what we are able to know. While our modes of understanding ought to correspond to the complexities confronting us in our modern technological society, they do not. “Soft” systems methodology helps us focus on what is problematic and how it can be approached — and offers direction to exert moral control over our tools and technologies. [Powerful new technologies] pose basic threats to people and to life on Earth . . . Unless we (...) learn to live with them in safety, our future is likely to be both exciting and short. We cannot hope to foresee all the problems ahead, yet by paying attention to the big, basic issues, we can perhaps foresee the greatest challenges and get some idea of how to deal with them (K. Erik Drexler, 1986). (shrink)

Cesario claims that all bias research tells us is that people “end up using the information they have come to learn as being probabilistically accurate in their daily lives”. We expose Cesario's flawed assumptions about the relationship between accuracy and bias. Through statistical simulations and empirical work, we show that even probabilistically accurate responses are regularly accompanied by bias.

Abstract I respond to three articles about my book, Hindu Theology and Biology, from David Gosling, Thomas Ellis, and Varadaraja Raman. I attempt to clarify misconceptions about Hindu intellectual history and the science and religion dialogue. I discuss the role of Hindu theologies in the contemporary world in response to the three articles, each of which highlights important areas of future research. I suggest that Hindu theology should be a critical discipline in which Hindu authors are interpreted in their own (...) terms and in conversation with contemporary authors. I argue that Hinduism and science can find an intellectual space between New Atheism (which denies the intellectual value of religion) and Neo-Hinduism (which neglects the critical discourse within the history of Hindu thought). (shrink)

Conrad Hal Waddington was a British developmental biologist who mainly worked in Cambridge and Edinburgh, but spent the late 1930s with Morgan in California learning about Drosophila. He was the first person to realize that development depended on the then unknown activities of genes, and he needed an appropriate model organism. His major experimental contributions were to show how mutation analysis could be used to investigate developmental mechanisms in Drosophila, and to explore how developmental mutation could drive evolution, his other (...) deep interest. Waddington was, however, predominantly a thinker, and set out to provide a coherent framework for understanding the genetic bases of embryogenesis and evolution, developing his ideas in many books. Perhaps his best-known concept is the epigenetic landscape: here a ball rolls down a complex valley, making path choices. The rolling ball represents a cell’s development over time, while the topography represents the changing regulatory environment that controls these choices. In its later forms, the role of each feature in the landscape was controlled by the effects of sets of interacting genes, an idea underpinning contemporary approaches to systems biology. Waddington was the first developmental geneticist and probably the most important developmental biologist of the pre-molecular age. (shrink)

Collected here for the first time, these writings demonstrate the range and precision of Philip Rieff's sociology of culture. Rieff addresses the rise of psychoanalytic and other spiritual disciplines that have reshaped contemporary culture.

This paper introduces an active–passive framework to the conceptualization and measurement of counterproductive work behavior (CWB), in order to establish a dimension that categorizes the content of behaviors within the existing interpersonally directed (CWBI) and organizationally directed (CWBO) framework. Doing so provides new insights into the relationship between workplace counterproductivity and sleep. Stressor-emotion models of CWB predict that employees engage in counterproductivity in response to workplace stressors, but extant research suggests that counterproductive behavior increases strain, including reduced sleep quality. We (...) develop a new scale for measuring CWB that differentiates active and passive behaviors and demonstrates the potential for positive intrapsychic consequences for passive CWBI. In Study 1, using five samples, we demonstrate the convergent and discriminant validity, reliability, and acceptable psychometric properties of a 19-item scale that reconceptualizes CWB into four dimensions: active CWBI, passive CWBI, active CWBO, and passive CWBO. In Study 2, using experience-sampling methodology, we found that when employees engage in active CWBO at work in the afternoon they experience reduced sleep quality that evening, whereas engaging in passive CWBI was related to increased sleep quality. (shrink)

Over the past thirty years, academic dialogues on the relationships between the sciences and religions have flourished, albeit primarily within Judeo-Christian historical, theological and philosophical contexts. Can a Hindu tradition be brought into this dialogue? The Bhagavata Purana is one of the most well-known sacred texts of India, and biology, Darwinism in particular, has become one of the most spirited areas of the science and religion dialogue in academia, as well as in the popular media. This thesis examines the possibility, (...) scope and foundational topics involved in a dialogue between Vaisnava-Hindu theology as found in the Bhāgavata, and the theoretical, philosophical and theological issues surrounding contemporary biology. To examine the possibility and scope of a Bhāgavata-science dialogue, I focus on the theological, ontological, epistemological and teleological presuppositions that each tradition bring to the study of nature, outlining the similarities and differences in their approaches. I establish the grounds for further discussion through a comparative analysis of terms such as "consciousness," "knowledge" and "goal of knowledge" as they appear in the Bhagavata and noteworthy Darwinian texts. My argument is that although prima facie the two traditions appear different in their philosophical, scientific and theological approaches, there are a number of areas of common interest and parallels, especially in their epistemologies and teleologies. In the case of genuine differences, such as their views on the ontology of consciousness, I demonstrate the possibility of reconciliation. Clarifying the conceptual differences, establishing parallels and demonstrating areas of common interests opens the possibility and widens the scope for further dialogue. (shrink)

In 2011, Peterson suggested that the main reason why C.H. Waddington was essentially ignored by the framers of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1950s was because they were Cartesian reductionists and mathematical population geneticists while he was a Whiteheadian organicist and experimental geneticist who worked with Drosophila. This paper suggests a further reason that can only be seen now. The former defined genes and their alleles by their selectable phenotypes, essentially the Mendelian view, while Waddington defined a gene through (...) its functional role as determined by genetic analysis, a view that foresaw the modern view that a gene is a DNA sequence with some function. The former were interested in selection, while Waddington focused on variation. The differences between the two views of a gene are briefly considered in the context of systems biology. (shrink)

Because the kidney (metanephros) starts to function before completing development, its patterning and morphogenesis need to be closely integrated with its growth. This is achieved by blast cells at the kidney periphery generating new nephrons that link up to the extending collecting‐duct arborisation, while earlier‐formed and more internal nephrons are maturing and beginning to filter serum. This pattern of development requires that cell division and apoptosis be co‐ordinated in the various kidney compartments (collecting‐ducts, blast cells, metanephric mesenchyme, nephrons and vascular (...) system). The underlying regulatory networks for cell proliferation are beginning to be unravelled, mainly through expression studies, mutation analysis and experimentation in vitro. This article summarises current knowledge of kidney growth and apoptosis, and analyses some of the 80 or so ligand–receptor pairings that seem to sustain development and growth. It also points to some unanswered questions, the most intriguing being what role does apoptosis play during normal kidney development? BioEssays 24:72–82, 2002. © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (shrink)

Although the segregation of mesenchyme into distinct aggregates is the first step in the development of a range of tissues that includes bones, somites, feathers and nephrons, we still know very little about the mechanisms by which this happens. There are two obvious types of explanation: first, that there are global pre‐patterns within the mesenchyme whose molecular expression leads to tissue fragmentation and, second, that the condensations arise spontaneously through the local morphogenetic abilities of the cells. The only known mechanism (...) for the latter possibility is cell traction and this paper suggests that current studies are compatible with traction playing a primary role in the formation of nephrogenic condensations in the developing kidney and the separation of somites, but not for the generation of feather rudiments where there is evidence of a prepattern of adhesivity. (shrink)

Three general types of problems entail different strategies. Continuing to seek solutions to tame problems when we face messes, let alone wicked problems, is potentially catastrophic hence fundamentally irresponsible. In our turbulent times, it is therefore becoming a strategic necessity to learn how to solve the right problems. Successful problem solving requires finding the right solution to the right problem. We fail more often because we solve the wrong problem than because we get the wrong solution to the right problem. (...) Russell Ackoff (1974). But then, you may agree that it becomes morally objectionable for the planner to treat a wicked problem as though it were a tame one, or to tame a wicked problem prematurely, or to refuse to recognize the inherent wickedness of social problems. Rittel and Webber (1973). (shrink)

Book reviewed in this article: A Private Choice: Abortion in America in the Seventies. By John T. Noonan, Jr. Aborting America. By Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., with Richard N. Ostling.

Book reviewed in this article: Abortion and the Private Practice of Medicine. By Jonathan B. Imber.