Difference between revisions of "Why Pigs Don't Have Wings"
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[ | <hide> | ||
[[keyname::2007-Fodor]] | |||
[[author::Fodor, J.]] | |||
[[year::2007]] | |||
[[cite/author::Fodor 2007]] | |||
[[title::Why Pigs Don't Have Wings]] | |||
[[published in::London Review of Books]] | |||
could turn out that there are indeed baboons in our family tree, but that natural selection isn't how they got there." He hints at a Fodor-led revolution in biology. In the November 1, 15 and 29 LRB issues a number of vexed philosophers and biologists responded and Fodor responded to them. Here is some more on the nouvelle vague in evolutionary biology... | [[cite/source::''[http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n20/print/fodo01_.html London Review of Books]'' (2007), October 18]] | ||
[[abstract::According to Jerry Fodor, many evolutionary biologists believe in adaptationism, the idea that (almost) everything can be explained via natural selection. He disagrees, contending that natural selection is "incoherent" and may not be the chief engine of evolution as Darwin believed: "it could turn out that there are indeed baboons in our family tree, but that natural selection isn't how they got there." He hints at a Fodor-led revolution in biology. In the November 1, 15 and 29 LRB issues a number of vexed philosophers and biologists responded and Fodor responded to them. Here is some more on the nouvelle vague in evolutionary biology...]] | |||
</hide>{{page/spec/target}} | |||
Latest revision as of 17:28, 25 July 2020
Why Pigs Don't Have Wings: Fodor, J. London Review of Books (2007), October 18 (2007).
Abstract
According to Jerry Fodor, many evolutionary biologists believe in adaptationism, the idea that (almost) everything can be explained via natural selection. He disagrees, contending that natural selection is "incoherent" and may not be the chief engine of evolution as Darwin believed: "it could turn out that there are indeed baboons in our family tree, but that natural selection isn't how they got there." He hints at a Fodor-led revolution in biology. In the November 1, 15 and 29 LRB issues a number of vexed philosophers and biologists responded and Fodor responded to them. Here is some more on the nouvelle vague in evolutionary biology...
Responses
| Date"Date" is a type and predefined property provided by Semantic MediaWiki to represent date values. | Author | Lead-in | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paley Redivivus | 28 December 2007 | J. E. R. Staddon | Fodor once more presents us with a persuasive, entertaining – and profoundly wrong – view of a great man. Not B. F. Skinner this time, but a much grander figure, none other than Charles Darwin. Fodor's often misdirected attacks on an extinct behaviorism. |
... more about "Why Pigs Don't Have Wings"
According to Jerry Fodor, many evolutionar … According to Jerry Fodor, many evolutionary biologists believe in adaptationism, the idea that (almost) everything can be explained via natural selection. He disagrees, contending that natural selection is "incoherent" and may not be the chief engine of evolution as Darwin believed: "it could turn out that there are indeed baboons in our family tree, but that natural selection isn't how they got there." He hints at a Fodor-led revolution in biology. In the November 1, 15 and 29 LRB issues a number of vexed philosophers and biologists responded and Fodor responded to them. Here is some more on the nouvelle vague in evolutionary biology... nouvelle vague in evolutionary biology... +
Fodor 2007 +
London Review of Books (2007), October 18 +